----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID:
<e60df304-bd9f-471f-b136-58ce9b819217n@googlegroups.com> 0cbf6677
@REPLY: <n99ehi16fvk9qou1ll1nth9tae0a96l4so@4ax.com>
d6b06b15
@REPLYADDR Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Burkhard
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID:
<e60df304-bd9f-471f-b136-58ce9b819217n@googlegroups.com>
@RFC-References:
<466856cd-24e5-4d99-9875-b895c2b641f0n@googlegroups.com> <540833db-44a3-476c-9910-e1da5bcd67bcn@googlegroups.com>
<n99ehi16fvk9qou1ll1nth9tae0a96l4so@4ax.com>
@TZUTC: -0700
@PID: G2/1.0
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:40:53 PM UTC+1, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 09:58:45 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by ? Tiib <
oot...@hot.ee>:
> >On Friday, 29 September 2023 at 15:05:53 UTC+3, JTEM is my hero wrote:
> >> If Intelligent Design didn`t exist we couldn`t talk about
> >> it. THERE`D BE NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT!
> >>
> >> Obviously it exists. Obviously we can talk about it.
> >>
> >> We can discuss the facts.
> >>
> >> So it`s real and that`s proof.
> >>
> >You are correct that all the things that we discuss exist as
topic of discussion.
> >But no one argues about that. Argument is if these are also actual reality.
> >That can not be true about all. All can not conform with
reality for simple reason
> >that these contradict with each other.
> ><
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of religions and spiritual traditions>
> ><
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of topics characterized as
pseudoscience>
> >
> You`re being trolled; no one with more than two neurons
> would write the above as a serious claim ("If we can talk
> about it that proves it exists"),
Ahem. Me, Meinong, Ed Zalta and the six neurons we have in between
us want to have a word...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract object theory
since the same would also
> apply to *anything we could imagine, from a flat Earth to
> tiny leprechauns living in our sinuses and making us sneeze,
> including literally *every* deity imagined by any group
> anywhere at any time.
>
> As you say, these things exist as topics of discussion, but
> the phrasing chosen says that is *not* how it was intended,
> but as an assertion that imagination creates physical
> reality. Multi-person solipsism, perhaps?
> >
> --
>
> Bob C.
>
> "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
> the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
> `Eureka!` but `That`s funny...`"
>
> - Isaac Asimov
--- G2/1.0
* Origin: University of Ediacara (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441