Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA22075 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 2 Oct 2000 18:16:31 +0100 Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:31:41 +0100 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: the conscious universe Message-ID: <20001002143141.A1989@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <20001002123026.AAA19795@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20001002123026.AAA19795@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 08:30:25AM -0400 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 08:30:25AM -0400, Wade T.Smith wrote:
> On 10/01/00 15:44, Robin Faichney said this-
>
> >Consider this: if P then Q; P; therefore Q.
>
> But life doesn't provide P all the time. Never did, and never will.
That's why the word "if" is in there.
> That's empirical science, and if you weren't so scornful of it, you might
> find it quite interesting.
I have a science degree, and have been employed as a researcher in
university science departments, and as a "Research Scientist" in
industry. I am not in the slightest scornful of it, I just recognise
its limitations.
> As to redundancy, if P then Q seems to provide
> a ton of it....
Please explain.
-- Robin Faichney=============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 18:17:56 BST