Re: Michael Anissimov's 'Shock Level Analysis'

Date: Fri Jan 18 2002 - 08:12:52 MST

> Given this fact, the assumption that there is only 1 reality is just as
> ungrounded as the assumption that there are many. Each of the approximations
> to reality that reason makes, only narrows down the space of possible
> realities a bit, it doesn't show that ony one true reality lies within this
> narrowed- down space.

 Are you saying there's a finite (or infinite) number of realities, and we're
randomly (or even orderly) cycling between them? And supposing that were true,
what stops me from saying "the only One True Reality" is nothing more than this
"set of sub-realities"?

> A good metaphor, in my view are uncomputable numbers. You can never express
> an uncomputable number, never give a real example of one. Yet you can
> construct a series of rational approximations to one, and know that you're
> getting closer & closer...

 I can't predict random numbers or the next roll of perfect dice either, but I
think I understand their One True Reality.

> Even so, that does not give "you" the right to exercise intolerance of people
> who are "wrong" (by your personal definition).

 So you're tolerant of the person who says the 6-sided die can sometimes roll a

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT