Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxt.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!js2j
From: js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.religion
Subject: Re: Rosen on reason, etc.
Message-ID: <721@mhuxt.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Mar-85 13:08:08 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxt.721
Posted: Fri Mar 29 13:08:08 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Mar-85 01:27:36 EST
References: <1074@decwrl.UUCP> <5266@utzoo.UUCP>, <720@pyuxd.UUCP> <5303@utzoo.UUCP>, <749@pyuxd.UUCP> <5332@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.philosophy:1581 net.religion:6361

> What I am assuming is that there are certain things which
> are not knowable. Why does the world exist? Why is Plank's constant
> *this* value and not *that* one? Why aren't there more stars? Why is
> there a force of gravity anyway? These are all examples of questions
> whose answers (ignoring direct revelation from God, say) are not knowable.
> There may be no reason for any of these. There may *be* a reason for all
> of these. But, whatever the answer is, it seems clear that we won't
> ever know it.
> Laura Creighton

     Just how do you decide if a given thing is unknowable?  If you
didn't know that it came out of a solution to Maxwell's equations, would
you see "Why is the speed of light *this* value and not *that* one?" as
another 'unknowable' question?  How do you know that further advances
in science won't answer questions which you now consider unknowable?
-- 
Jeff Sonntag
ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j
    "Parts is parts."-Jack the Ripper