Re: Thoughts and Perceptions

From: Wade T.Smith (
Date: Wed Apr 17 2002 - 20:59:15 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Thoughts and Perceptions"

    Received: by id VAA20987 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 21:05:21 +0100
    Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:59:15 -0400
    Subject: Re: Thoughts and Perceptions
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Message-Id: <>
    X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481)
    Precedence: bulk

    On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 01:56 , Lawrence DeBivort wrote:

    > Each of these deifintions posits an observer or a 'stator.' So, I think
    > Grant's point is well taken, and stand corrected. I think Wade is
    > using the
    > term to refer to the "auctual existence" of the thing, regardless of
    > whether
    > it is observed or stated.

    Man is the measure of all things.

    He ain't the maker of what's being measured. (Unless he is, and,
    admittedly, in this little and local corner of the universe, he makes
    quite a bit.)

    And what's being measured is a 'fact'.

    The type of measurement is not. It might even be a concept.

    Yes, gravity is a fact without anyone being about to measure it.

    Grant will fall off that bridge without needing any concept of falling,
    or bridge, or gravity.

    - Wade

    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 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 21:22:06 BST