Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA18151 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:53:10 GMT X-Originating-IP: [188.8.131.52] From: "Grant Callaghan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Re: FW: MD Dawkins on quantum/mysticism convergence Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 11:47:12 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <LAW2-F1199RZl1L7yXn0000acbc@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Mar 2002 19:47:12.0307 (UTC) FILETIME=[88233830:01C1CDEC] Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
>Since we cannot be certain of anything and our Western scientistic
>worldview crumbles at the subatomic level, whatever subjectivist mumbo
>I happen to spout is just as valid as whatever objectivist mumbo-jumbo you
>spout off. We are just two subjective ships passing along a sea of quantum
>uncertainty. My whims are as valid as your hard won knowledge.
>Does this help?
I'm not sure what it helps, but until we can agree with any certainty on
what the words we are using refer to, it pretty much states the case. A lot
of the confusion can be cleared up by looking at what the writer is trying
to do with his words. As Wade pointed out, the man who is using his words
to sell snake oil does not use them to mean the same thing as the man who is
using the same words to add to the world's body of knowledge. Meaning is
tied to context and intent. Words in isolation have no meaning.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 17 2002 - 20:08:10 GMT