From: Kathryn Aegis (aegis@igc.apc.org)
Date: Thu Apr 24 1997 - 19:18:15 MDT
>Max More:
>> Philosophical nit-pick: The logical positivists would not say this. They
>> would say that the question of the existence of atoms is meaningless *if*
>> they cannot be observed. Any statement that cannot be broken down into
>> directly observable entities is meaningless to the logical positivists.
Perutz may have meant just that, but English is not his native
language. My notes indicate he said: the logical positivists argued
against the existence of the atom because it could not be seen.
Sin,
Kathryn Aegis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:23 MST