From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Feb 21 2005 - 13:57:53 GMT
Erin stated February 20th:
Could you answer a couple a questions for me.
1) What is the best definition of empirical in your opinion?
Ant McWatt answers:
Sorry about this Erin but when I said I agree with Ron it’s because I also
have little interest in the issue of empiricism as it has been discussed on
MOQ Discuss recently.
ERIN: Alrighty but it seems kind of funny after a post demanding clarity and explanation you give me this kind of answer when I request the same on your part. C'mon seeing is believing. Not defining it is only confirming my belief that extending it leads to confusion---is it so confused that the word is not definable now? So when you complained that the meaning of "supernatural" was extended so far it rendered the word meaningless---you think a fair response would be sorry but I'm not interested in defining it?
I guess the conversation is over but just to clarify for you about this:
Erin stated February 20th:
...especially when other distinctions,e.g. types of quality or another fave
typing by politically-proned members--types of people) are welcomed here
Ant McWatt comments:
Erin, this last section is gobbledegook (those typos again!) or a riddle by
the Mad Hatter or possibly both. It would therefore be helpful if you could
re-state it if there is a serious point lurking in there somewhere,
ERIN: I was just trying to understand why some distinctions are allowed (those above are just two examples) but distinguishing types of experiences by using the word empirical is taboo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Feb 21 2005 - 14:42:58 GMT