Re: "scientism"

t (
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 14:29:10 EDT

From: <>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 14:29:10 EDT
Subject: Re: "scientism"

In a message dated 4/9/99 12:44:21 PM Central Daylight Time, writes:

<< >
>Joe Dees made the counter point. I read it. Did you? Faichey did.
>Apparently you did not follow the drift. Perhaps you were paying more
>attention to egos rather than ideas?

Did I? Could someone please remind me, as I don't recall seeing any
definition of reality here recently.
Robin Faichney >>

No. It seemed to me that you were suggesting some sort of dichotomy between
reality and "ultimate reality". When I asked you about it, instead of
providing some definition of ultimate reality, you asked me for some
definition of reality - which didn't really seem appropriate since it was you
that brought up "ultimate reality" not I. So I dropped it, but then Joe
piped in with a different repsonse on the subject which you acknowleged.

<< In message <>, joe
dees <> writes
>>I did *not* say that nothing is real.
>>Robin Faichney
>And wise you were not to. To maintain that there is nothing that is
real is as
>absurd as maintaining that everything is, for you have stripped the
meaning from
>the word...
>Joe E. Dees
>Poet, Pagan, Philosopher

The pearls of your wisdom dazzle us, Joe.
Robin J. Faichney
Guru, Genius, Geriatric

But really if you NEED a definition of reality from me, I can't imagine your
"ultimate reality" making any sense at all. I am certainly not going to
voluteer to untangle your mystical vocabulary and I am sure you don't need
any help. If you have some insight that we are lacking, please don't be shy.
I had assumed that we both had some agreement on the word "reality", but if
not, I can't imagine the discussion really going anywhere. If you think
reality is an illusion, I simply can't even begin to take that seriously.

You say nothing is real. I disagree. End of conversation. Beyond that I
don't see the point of volunteering anything more. If you think I have not
considered something important then please bring it to my attention.

BTW, Robin, I realize that you probably were done as well, because you hadn't
said anything more, but for some odd reason, Chris thought that we should
have something more to say to each other. I had thought we were sort of
finished. For some strange reason he sees all sorts of "responsibilities"
for people to research things, and definine things, and discuss things,
materializing out of the blue. I was under the impression that this all was
voluntary, and that no one is responsible to voluteer even if asked - silly
me, I guess he is just far more altruistically minded than I and apparently
others on this list are.


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)