Salutatio Todd!
26-Jan-98, Todd Henson wrote to Joe Martin
          Subject: Existence exists
 TH>> You didn't fully understand the depth of the question. The
 TH>> question addressed a hypothetical situation in which there was
 TH>> absolutely *nothing* in existence at all - no matter, energy, God
 TH>> or gods, universe, multiverse, forces, properties, universal
 TH>> laws, etc. Quantum uncertainty is a property of reality. The
 TH>> question assumed the complete absence of any kind of reality and
 TH>> such properties.
 JM>> Why even propose such a wild, albeit hypothetical, situation.
 JM>> That's like asking the question:
 JM>> If your parents didn't have any children at all and didn't adopt
 JM>> or kidnap any, do you think YOU will have kids?
 JM>> Todd, the question _has_ no depth other than immense obsurdity.
 TH> Joe, I don't know how old you are, or intelligent, but hopefully
 TH> your annoying lack of experience is an ill that time can cure, as
 TH> with us all when we are beginners. I'm not sure how much
 TH> experience you have had with this echo, or with truly meaningful
 TH> phil in general, but experience will teach the wise that such
 TH> questions are necessary. If you really understood the mindset of
 TH> this echo, you would know what I mean.
Todd, Joe is the last person in FIDO who needs that speech.  Perhaps you
should develop a tougher skin? ;)
 TH> People here have historically shown a similar lack of clarity Joe.
Todd, until you actually do read and consider anyone's arguments (and
not forget them, like you always do to me), you are in no position to
preach to anyone about "lack of clarity".
 TH> Many who have passed through these cyber-halls have been so
 TH> deluded as to think that the laws of reality really do bend
 TH> according to the whims of the observer.
And the above statement is proof enough.  I can only think that you are
referring to my past statement that "truth is relative to the observer".
I had provided enough examples when I stated this to make my point
crystal clear to anyone who can read, consider logically, and maintain
some semblance of a memory.  It is not my fault that you continuously
bring up your version, which is clearly wrought from an unfathomably
ignorant mind.
 TH> At the present, there are
 TH> more than a few here who are also willfully ignorant.
Like yourself, Todd?  Really. ;)
 TH> For this
 TH> reason, I chose to start from the absolute beginning, an obvious
 TH> truth which hopefully even the more foolish ones can grasp,
 TH> thereby allowing more of us to actually find common ground from
 TH> which to start a philosophical exploration. With some people, such
 TH> absurd questions as the one I posed are sometimes necessary.
I did like your attempt, I have to admit that.  It looked okay to me for
a start on a topic that is not purely religious.  If it can be managed I
would like to continue on it,... provided you at least try to consider
my statements.
 Dicere...
 email address (vrmeic@spots.ab.ca)
Richard Meic
--- Terminate 5.00/Pro 
---------------