Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 08:11:38 -0400 From: Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: dave@jetcafe.org, nwestfal@directvinternet.com, keramida@ceid.upatras.gr, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <20020912081138.32b7505f.yid@softhome.net> In-Reply-To: <3D808065.4350244D@mindspring.com> References: <200209120405.g8C45u153131@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> <3D808065.4350244D@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 04:54:13 -0700 Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> wrote: > Dave, the person who can predictively describe the universe as > a derivation of the least number of assumptions wins. This is > because it's *simpler* to have fewer assumptions. > > Each assumption is a "deux ex machina", which you will not be > able to logically communicate to another person. You can only [...] > The larger your set of assumptions, the lower the probability > that all your assumptions will be shared by someone else, and > therefore the lower the probability that you will be able to > effectively communicate with them, and the smaller your This explains neatly why whenever I am stupid enough to get involved in a thread about religion or politics, I hit a brick wall. My assumptions, especially in the realm of religion unless one is an Orthodox Jewish mystic (and even then there will be differences of opinion, though probably not enough to halt rational intercourse), are different than the majority of people. 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?20020912081138.32b7505f.yid>