[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[Hamilton Priday]

Hello Micah --


> Ham,
>
> The problem is; that Craig is making an assumption (inorganic awareness)
> while you are not (nothing). He then somehow is able to think that the 
> lack
> of an assumption is an assumption on your part, which he then asks you to
> prove. This seems to happen with great frequency on this list. Muddy
> thinking.

Yes, on the surface, your analysis seems to make sense.  However, since 
Craig has participated in this forum before, he should know my position on 
proprietary awareness.  I suspect he's toying with me.

And, speaking of toying, Micah, when are you going to come out from behind 
the wall and outline your own ontology?

I've mentioned this before.  It's one thing to become a pariah for 
presenting a thesis that contradicts the MoQ; but you appear to have earned 
that distinction by expressing only cryptic retorts to selected statements 
by others.  What do you stand to lose by explaining the philosophy behind 
those retorts?

I've lost all my messages prior to 3/13, but I recall some thoughtful 
exchanges we had last year concerning Ayn Rand's Objectivism.  Since then, 
the remarks you've made would seem to support a phenomenalistic worldview, 
if not solipsism.  I, for one, would be interested in seeing a fuller 
explication of your assertions.  I also think it would gain you the respect 
of this group, however "incompatible" it may be with Pirsig's philosophy.

Just a suggestion from a fellow contrarian.

Cheers,
Ham