Xref: utzoo sci.misc:1215 talk.philosophy.misc:966
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ames!lll-lcc!pyramid!thirdi!sarge
From: sarge@thirdi.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode)
Newsgroups: sci.misc,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: The nature of reality.
Message-ID: <378@thirdi.UUCP>
Date: 30 Mar 88 02:23:42 GMT
References: <2868@gryphon.CTS.COM> <343@thirdi.UUCP> <732@actnyc.UUCP> <356@thirdi.UUCP> <3503@dasys1.UUCP> <369@thirdi.UUCP> <4268@hoptoad.uucp>
Reply-To: sarge@thirdi.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode)
Organization: Institute for Research in Metapsychology
Lines: 24
Keywords: reality credibility validity
Summary: It's called "science".

In article <4268@hoptoad.uucp> laura@hoptoad.UUCP (Laura Creighton) writes:
>In article <369@thirdi.UUCP> sarge@thirdi.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode) writes:
>>"Perhaps if we pooled our experiences and ironed out our differences, and if
>>we applied the rules of logic and other rules by which we all organize our
>>respective worlds, we could come to an agreement about what the nature of an
>>elephant is."

>I don't think so.  That ``ironing out the differences'' stuff is
>going to be difficult.  Methink that the elephant will die of old age.
>Will that be an objectively dead elephant?  or only a subjectively
>dead one?

As they say, "I never promised you a rose garden."  Sure, it's hard to reach
agreements.  But by the evolution of scientific method, we have made great
inroads into the process.  The process of ironing out the differences is what
I call science, demonstration, and rational discourse.
-- 
"The map may not be the territory, but it's all we've got."

Sarge Gerbode
Institute for Research in Metapsychology
950 Guinda St.
Palo Alto, CA 94301
UUCP:  pyramid!thirdi!sarge