From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Oct 27 2004 - 06:49:05 BST
All sounds reasonable but I never thought the empirical label applied to the resurrection. I was trying to understand if it really applied to Quality/values.
Would you do this reasoning step-by-step for empirical evidence for Quality/values the way you did it for no empirical evidence for the resurrection.
Erin
Mark Steven Heyman <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com> wrote:
So, say, when someone tells you they've witnessed a resurrection,
this doesn't mean that it's possible to bring dead people back to
life, and a rational empiricist philosophy is by no means committed
to such an idea. The report of a resurrection does not constitute
empirical evidence of a resurrection. Rather, it might be a starting
point for further rational and empirical investigation, which would
include the real empirical evidence of of what happens to human
bodies after death, and the logical argument, supported by empirical
evidence, that its impossible to reactivate a human brain after the
brain has physically disintegrated.
Let me just leave it here for now, and see what you think.
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
-- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is everything." -- Henri Poincare' On 26 Oct 2004 at 18:20, Erin wrote: Simon Magson wrote: ERIN: >You used the example of being thirsty and drinking (drinking is >observable, your being thirsty isn't SM: Everybody knows when they are thirsty, it is completely observable by anyone. ERIN: I would say everyone experiences thirst. It is not observable though. For example, a young kid at a party is he drinking because he is thirsty or from peer pressure, I don't know because I can not observe his thirst. SM: Philosophy should start with these simple observations and not some physiological theory resulting from a chain of deductions. Thirst, like hunger, pain, heavy, light, hard, soft are all present and immediate in the real world from which we develop our rhetoric and start philosophising. ERIN: again the difference one really is observable and the other is reasoned about. It is a reasonable assumption that when somebody drinks he it is because he is experiencing thirst. (but i still think it is the drinking that is being observed not the thirst) ERIN: >The actions that stem from values are observable but values are not so >don't feel comfortable with "value is empirical" statement. SM: The lack of comfort you are describing is itself an empirical value. It seems you have been conditioned to perceive value in, and ascribe existence to, only that which you can see. ERIN: The lack of comfort is when a definition is stretched so far that it is being used in situations that isalmost theopposite of the meaning and so the word loses all meaning. NO, I am not conditioned to perceive value to only what I can see, I am "conditioned" to using the dictionary meanings and applyingthe word empirical to which is observable (not only see, but hear, touch, taste, etc. JUST SO IT ISOBSERVABLE). I do experience values that are not observable but ***I*** don't label them as "empirical", 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 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 : Wed Oct 27 2004 - 07:20:37 BST