stefano.vaj at gmail.com
Sat Feb 6 16:08:06 UTC 2010
On 6 February 2010 09:37, Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> BTW, this is a great paper. I've been reading through it, and so far, it seems to make perfect sense. The basic idea is simple and elegant, and as far as I can see, completely solves all these circular discussions we've been having on this list. I'm sure certain parties wouldn't agree with that opinion though!
Indeed. Even though he is too pessimistic in saying that "cannot
accept that we cannot exist". We should say "we cannot avoid making
use of reflexive indicators", but there are plenty of other useful,
understandable and practical concepts to which no "essence" really
corresponds. Why should one's "self" be an exception? Most of dualism
can easily be reduced to linguistic short-circuits and paradoxes...
More information about the extropy-chat