From: Michael Lorrey (retroman@tpk.net)
Date: Mon Nov 25 1996 - 17:17:02 MST
John K Clark wrote:
>
> It's true, the idea that the past existed has not been proved and probably
> can never be proven, but I don't demand proof for everything I believe,
> nobody could live that way. Until somebody comes up with a better idea I
> would be most reluctant to abandon The Past Hypothesis, because if I did
> I would also have to give up a tool that is even more important than logic
> in helping me understand how the world works, Induction. Without Induction I
> would be hopelessly confused and be unable to protect myself from any of the
> dangers that are lurking everywhere in the environment. Without Induction
> I would undoubtedly do something stupid and be dead in minutes if not seconds,
> that's why evolution gave it to us, animals who lacked it were unable to
> reproduce their genes. If the Past Hypothesis is a fiction it is a very
> useful fiction.
>
> The God Hypothesis on the other hand does not give me a corresponding tool of
> vast power like Induction, it does not give me any tool at all, it just
> generates wheels within wheels. Personally I think the world is hard enough
> to understand as it is and I see no point in adding complications when there
> is no payoff for doing so. If The God Hypothesis is the truth it is a
> useless truth.
>
I would say that Induction is a great way to help using the Past
Hypothesis as a tool to deal with the present. What would be a good tool
to use the God Hypothesis constructively to deal with the future?
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey --------------------------------------------------- President retroman@tpk.net Northstar Technologies Agent Lorrey@ThePentagon.com Inventor of the Lorrey Drive Silo_1013@ThePentagon.com --------------------------------------------------- Anything I say can and should be used against me.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:51 MST