sorry about your name, that was unintentional.

i didn't respond to your insight that i was juxtaposing dualism vs. nondualism because i had no knowledge that i was doing that or any understanding with respect to the notion.

hmm, i'm not really sure why i put 'for consistency' in the title.
i suppose it was because of your implication that i was not being consistent.

i think others than mathematicians can discuss things that logically may not exist together and prosper from that discussion.

demagogues bore me for the most part, i'm more troubled by those that fall for their rhetoric than the actual demagogue.

ha, ha, no i don't think my Swiss ancestry has afforded me the ability to unbiased judgement in matters of logical rigor. it was only my attempt to show that neutrality among power structures is a historical fact hence a conceivable attribute, which i had earlier ascribed as an attribute of God. (note: i realize the Swiss were less than neutral in reality but the concept of neutrality need not be stained by that fact.)

regards, tim

• Forum demise - ericb - May 29, 2003 - 12:32 UTC
  • self defense - sagefr0g - May 29, 2003 - 13:45 UTC
    • since you are a rational type - ericb - May 30, 2003 - 10:46 UTC
      • Why don't you find out yourself? - harvey1 - May 30, 2003 - 15:30 UTC
      • sorry i can't help you - sagefr0g - May 30, 2003 - 22:13 UTC