RE: Has anyone seen my neutral pointer?
September 18, 2016 at 7:15 pm
(This post was last modified: September 18, 2016 at 7:19 pm by bennyboy.)
If you want to define "material" as "whatever seems to be consistently observable," that's fine. However, the fact is that many scientists were held back by their conceptions of what material is. Some of them saw the necessity of letting go of that "billiard-ball" view, and some of them never could-- they could not follow the path that scientific observations were revealing because they had a strong pre-set view of what material was/should be.
I'm not sure why you think I'm critiquing materialism. . . maybe you're carrying in baggage from previous threads, and you need to establish a "neutral pointer?" Why don't you respond to what IS being said, instead of what you believe me most likely to be saying?
I'm not sure why you think I'm critiquing materialism. . . maybe you're carrying in baggage from previous threads, and you need to establish a "neutral pointer?" Why don't you respond to what IS being said, instead of what you believe me most likely to be saying?
