Tangible vs True ??

Ian Goddard (igoddard@erols.com)
Thu, 19 Mar 1998 03:15:05 -0500

Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net)

>> IAN: Where did I say "a definition is an argument"?
>In almost everything you write. You spend pages and pages
>on defining "Identity" and claim that this is an exercise
>of reason in itself. You can have your definition if you
>like--it's no skin off my nose. But the old definition--
>even if it's "wrong" in some sense--manages to feed me,
>build houses, move me around, and generally make my life
>interesting. If you want us to accept your definition,
>show us how using your definition /accomplishes/ something
>tangible and real in my life.

IAN: That there is, a tangible world is a result
of the fact that identity is holistic. If atomism
was somehow true, there would be no tangible world.
Every thing is what it is only due to relations.
So holistic identity gives you a tangible world.

For me, a quest into the nature of truth seems much
more interesting and important than faster cars and
better mouse traps. To me it seems that seeing such
things as the end-all measure of value is trivial
and shallow, but that's what makes me a weirdo.

VISIT Ian Williams Goddard ----> http://www.erols.com/igoddard

TWA-800 CASE CORE --> http://www.erols.com/igoddard/twa-core.htm