[MD] Theism and literalism

[david buchanan]

Scott and all MOQers:

Scott said:
To say there is value in the inorganic is to add a claim beyond theempirical 
evidence. It does not agree with the data better than, say, the 
non-spatiotemporal causal model. Yes, it works better within the MOQ. So 
what you are saying is: let's assume the MOQ, including its non-empirical 
claim that Quality is omnipresent (a non-empirical claim since the data just 
shows the reality of Quality in humans, and perhaps some biological), and to 
be consistent we will adopt the preference view of the quantum measurement 
problem over other views. Yes, that is all consistent, and works. It is just
not empirical.

dmb says:
Its not empirical!? Hmmm. Apparently, I not only have to spoon this idea 
right into your mouth, I have to chew it up for you as well. OK, I'll give 
this thing one more try. Let me begin with a little reality check again. 
According to Merriam-Webster Online, the term "empirical" means "1. 
originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data> 2. 
relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for 
system and theory 3. capable of being verifed or disproved by observation or 
experiment. 4. of or relating to empiricism".

Just to be perfectly clear, I'm using the first, most basic definition of 
the term. That is, the preference model is simply "based on observation". Am 
I saying that we can actually observe the electrons making those choices, 
that we can directly see them make a choice? No, of course not. (I don't 
even understand how such a thing could be possible.) The preference model is 
an explanation of the data, an interpretation of the observations. Its a 
conclusion "based on observation". The conclusion itself is not observed, it 
is constructed by the observers.

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/