On 02 Sep 2010, at 19:23, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 02.09.2010 17:57 Bruno Marchal said the following:
...
Science is only collection of theories, and statements derive in
those theories, and intepretation rules, and confirmation modus
operandi. Only layman and engineers have to hope that
on 03.09.2010 10:10 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 02 Sep 2010, at 19:23, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 02.09.2010 17:57 Bruno Marchal said the following: ...
Science is only collection of theories, and statements derive in
those theories, and intepretation rules, and confirmation modus
On 03 Sep 2010, at 15:55, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 03.09.2010 10:10 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 02 Sep 2010, at 19:23, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 02.09.2010 17:57 Bruno Marchal said the following: ...
Science is only collection of theories, and statements derive in
those theories,
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Scientifically I think there are possible data
that would count as evidence against physicalism. For example, if persons
reporting out-of-body experiences could actually gain knowledge not
otherwise available via
on 03.09.2010 06:46 Brent Meeker said the following:
On 9/2/2010 1:32 AM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com
wrote:
...
Of course it is *logically* possible that any new data could be
consistent with physicalism - but then logical
5 matches
Mail list logo
