Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Digest Number 175

Expand Messages
  • Jack
    Hey all, Thanks for the reply Randy, its cleared up most of the confusion I obviously had with your thoughts. A few things... ... I see
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 17 8:31 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey all,

      Thanks for the reply Randy, its cleared up most of
      the confusion I obviously had with your thoughts.

      A few things...

      <snippetty-snip>
      > Yes, it does imply that to you. It doesn't to me....why would
      > statement nothing is real mean that something is real?
      >

      I see clearly now that I made a bit of a mistake in my last
      mail.

      I think now that I was trying to allude to a statement that
      lives in antagonism with the statement you made. This,
      perhaps, will make more sense:

      "nothing is truly real" is the denial of,

      "something is truly real"

      Now, why did I want to say that?

      <snip>
      > > For people that don't get this: This is an issue of context. This
      > > discussion is about all possible realities, not simply the reality
      > > knowable by human perception.
      > >
      > >What other reality is there?
      >
      > Never claimed there was one...simply said we can't know one way or the other.
      >

      I think you were making these two claims:

      there are many realities
      there is a reality knowable by human perception.

      Previously, I took issue with the first, without making an
      argument. I still don't like it. But again I can't think of
      anything to say.

      Even though I realise your not saying there are other
      realities, just saying that there *could* be, but we can't
      know, is, I think tiresome. Mainly because by making that
      claim you say very little about the way things are.

      Cheerio
      Jack

      ----------------------
      Jack
      jack.darach@...
    • Jack
      Ok, I think I ve thought of something else to say here, ... would ... I see clearly now that I made a bit of a mistake in my last
      Message 2 of 2 , Aug 17 3:23 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Ok, I think I've thought of something else to say here,

        <SNIP FROM MY LAST REPLY>
        > Yes, it does imply that to you. It doesn't to me....why
        would
        > statement nothing is real mean that something is real?
        >

        I see clearly now that I made a bit of a mistake in my last
        mail.

        I think now that I was trying to allude to a statement that
        lives in antagonism with the statement you made. This,
        perhaps, will make more sense:

        "nothing is truly real" is the denial of,

        "something is truly real"

        Now, why did I want to say that?
        </SNIP>

        A thought has just struck me.
        Randy: You said there could be something really real but
        that we could never know this or not. It was a possiblitie,
        albeit one we could not verify.

        If your statement, "nothing is really real" is true
        and it does deny, "something is truly real"

        Then doesn't this deny the posibility of there being
        something really real?
        So we couldn't be in a position to
        say that there *could* be something really real.

        To sum up, to say nothing is truly real implies the denial
        of the statement something is truly real. This denies the
        possibility of there being something real.

        Contradiction.

        I haven't looked back on what else you said,
        apologies if I've gone off on a tangent again. But I feel
        I'm making a valid point here.

        Yours respectfully

        Jack

        ----------------------
        jack.darach@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.