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
Philosophy's Gelatinous Rulebook

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Luis Hamburgh on September 8, 2002 15:21:26 UTC


I'm so glad you're back.

Aurino's point -- though I think he may have strayed from it (for instance, by mentioning biology) -- was that often, although the intent of participants in a philosophical discussion might be (should be, probably) to arrive at a mutual recognition of the source(s) of misunderstanding, the discussants themselves often proceed to a point where their differences are less significant than their individual assessments of the terms they use while discussing these differences.

For example, imagine a situation where the differences between discussants' unique and subjective definitions of the terms they use are more significant than the actual source of disagreement itself. As there is no singular rulebook for these matters, if neither discussant recognizes this quirk then their disagreement might become a huge waste of 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 1994-2018 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