Hello,

At its most rudimentary level, contemplation consists of things and action. Indeed, some would parallel this proposal with uncertainty (let’s roll a doobie and talk about "fuzzy reality”). "Light propagates." "Fire burns." "Airplane flies." Each of these statements reflects the pairing of a thing with an action. At best, philosophical counterparts; at worst, contextually accurate.

Aurino : "Reality exists."

Staf : "Reality might not exist."

The more clearly expressed view here – in my opinion – is the one proposing that "reality" (a thing) and "exist" (an action) are philosophical counterparts.

Staf, what thing are you placing on a level commensurate with "exist," since "reality" doesn’t quite make it for you?

-LH

• I don't think we disagree at all - aurino_s - August 16, 2002 - 12:40 UTC
  • Physics does not explain reality - yanniru - August 16, 2002 - 13:52 UTC