" I just find it difficult to argue with you when it feels like you're not trying to make a point. "

I AM trying to make a point. The point is that any argument can be reduced to a play with words. The easiest way to prove someone wrong is to show that their argument violates the rules of language. When it comes to assertions about the physical world, facts are more important than semantics, but when it comes to deciding what words mean, semantics is the only game.

" I didn't come up with a definition, I just drew a correlation between the terms "physical" and "existent" without bothering to define them... "

Sorry Mario, but a proposed correlation between two terms IS a definition. The point is not whether "physical" and "existing" are the same thing, the point is can they be thought of as being the same thing?

" I simply see them as being quite nearly synonyms. "

"synonym"? See, even you realize it's a problem of semantics.

" Hallucinations and poverty? They *exist* to the extent that they are concepts that our minds have descriptions for, and they *exist* to the extent that they have their foundations rooted in physicality, and they *exist* to the extent that our minds exist, yes. "

If you follow that line of thinking, you will end up "discovering" that unicorns also exist.

Don't be fooled by your own naivete Mario, people far smarter than you and I have been debating those questions for centuries and they still do not know the answers.

" I'm not a dualist. "

Yes you are, you just don't know it. Like death and taxes, there's no escape from dualism, although you can certainly hide from it for a while.

• Yea, Verily - stormcrow - May 23, 2003 - 23:07 UTC
  • Wrapping up - villa-lobos - May 26, 2003 - 14:10 UTC