[lit-ideas] Re: This is a post in which I am not even going to mention God.
- From: Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 05:01:39 -0400
On 10/19/2010 2:34 AM, Mike Geary wrote:
I do believe that we are through and through physical
creatures -- but physicality? What the hell does that mean? It means
nothing to a cosmic ray which can and does shoot through physical masses
like the earth and never touch anything.
Physicalist explanations are essentially
materialist explanations with energy thrown in, to
allow the speaker to be appear to be more precise
and make a big hit at cocktail parties, line
dances, and shotgun weddings. It's another,
better, term for materialism, especially after the
old E = m times and a constant discovery.
However, exactly what physicalist explanations
seem to consist of also seems to change, given the
slightly more recent and stunning stuff like
Bell's Theorem, which capped the EPR-Bohr debate.
As for the first momentous question, I haven't met
any Tea Party people, believe it to be a media
spectacle devoid of content, sort of like the
presumed inner life of Michael Moore.
As for the other momentous question, consensus
right now is that the Big Bang itself created both
the time *and* the space (!) into which it
ramified. Since we are all inside the big bang and
consist of it, we're probably not in a great
position to speculate about a lot, though I like
ladybugs.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
