Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Harv, Take A Little Time To Think!!!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on April 3, 2002 18:06:04 UTC


Your comments themselves are inconsistent!

*****Cut from your note:

***How did this collection of people get to be a "set of numbers"? You seem to "know" something about reality which is beyond me. Please explain how you intend to define "people".***

If reality is a set of numbers, then we can say that the collection of people are a set of numbers (one number per person having the collection of numbers in their heads).

***Or is it that you think that it is impossible that any explanation of reality could ever be conceived which did not include the concept "people". If that is true, please show me your proof***

Just the opposite. My definition of reality is not related to people. It is simply 'all that is'.


You can't have it both ways Harv! If the concept of reality under discussion is not related to "people", you can't use arguments about "people" to show that the concept is inconsistent!

I know you know better than that!! Come on, stop wasting my time!


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins