Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:07:38 -0700 From: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <200209122207.g8CM7h160471@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > Dave Hayes wrote: >> > Dave, the person who can predictively describe the universe as >> > a derivation of the least number of assumptions wins. >> >> Wins what? > > Wins closer the truth. The truth is not won by contest or argument. The truth is not a prize. >> > Each assumption is a "deux ex machina", which you will not be >> > able to logically communicate to another person. >> >> This is also an assumption. > > Gee, I guess I've failed to communicate it to you... I guess I > must be right... 8-). In your own space, you are. In mine, you aren't. >> > You can only logically communicate information based on your set of >> > shared assumptions, or shared principles derived from those >> > assumptions, which fortuitously coincide. >> >> I don't agree that this is true, by my own observation. I continually >> manage to communicate information devoid of logic, berift of >> derivation, which has no real shared principle other than a set of >> agreed upon frequencies to use as raw materials. >> >> I play music. > > Music is, at it's heart, mathematics. Maybe Bach is, but I guarantee you neither Marvin Gaye nor Pat Metheny is. More generally, for Jazz and it's subsets, the resemblence to math is lost and emotion instead reigns supreme. >> > This is the point you miss over and over again: it's possible >> > for an individual and the larger homogeneous society to have >> > irreconcilable differences, which may include continued >> > tolerance of each others existance. >> >> Big words and lofty notions of knowledge aside, this is really a >> simple matter. All I've ever asked is for people to show a little >> maturity when dealing with obvious trolls. Why does this incite a >> two-week+ thread which delves into PhD level mathematics? > > Because it's an unreasonable request, Unreasonable by your arbitrary standards of reasonability. Thing is, the people that would support me in this notion have already exercised their power by ignoring our banter. Those that would support you can't ignore it, and therefore will participate. This works to deny you the truth. > and it takes that level of effort to get to a point where you can't > successfully dismiss the arguments regarding the unreasonableness of > the request. I've -already- dismissed them as poppycock. I doubt you can convince me otherwise. >> You go on and on about "prove this" or "demonstrate that" or even "the >> best answers are simple". >> >> But you never ever answer this original, simple, thought. > > I have answered it many times. With a lot of rubbish, yes. > But you don't value the contributions of people like John Dyson or > Loqui Chen or Who? > ..., people who fall into the category of useful, but who you value > less than the trolls. I can't devalue thsoe I do not know. ------ Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< Nasrudin called at a large house to collect for charity. The servant said "My master is out." Nasrudin replied, "Tell your master that next time he goes out, he should not leave his face at the window. Someone might steal it." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200209122207.g8CM7h160471>