Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (69164)	12/3/2002 9:51:34 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Can the differences be significant with no one to call them significant? Things may have been what they were- but without someone to call them significant, are they? The question is really, what is "significance? Is it a word, or does it have existence apart from the word idea. The thesis CH and I have, is that it does not. You say it does, and seem to think that by saying that over and over in many different ways you make it true. I do not think that works- even if your dead professor might have agreed with you. If he would have agreed with you, he would have been wrong too. IMO, of course. I could probably dig up a few bodies to agree with me, but what would be the point?

To: Neocon who wrote (69164)	12/3/2002 11:07:05 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I assure you, planets existed outside of our solar system before 1600. Of course they did. But since humans had no idea they existed, humans could not assign importance or unimportance to them. That's the only point I'm making. It's really a quite simple point. I'm glad that you were able to have an experience of Klein. He was an extraordinary teacher. My argument is that the differences are significant before anyone comes along to notice them. Why? What made the differences significant? I'm merely trying to get you, too, to understand what the thesis is.