[MD] Heads or tails?

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Case <Case at iSpots.com>:

> > [Case]
> > It was a long and hard battle to finally discredit Aristotle's absurd 
> > notion of final cause. "Oops" is merely a modern refinement in this
> process.
> > Regression into a search for imaginary future perfect states is not so
> much hope for an explanation as it is a form a psychosis.
> 
> [Platt]
> Lots of very intelligence people disagree with your diagnosis. But, they
> could be wrong.
> 
> [Case]
> Three that come to mind are you, Ham and Ken Wilber. You generally go
> straight to the wishful thinking argument that the idea is just disturbing
> and unsatisfying. Ham loads on a pile of meaningless terminology in the hope
> of talking it to death. Wilber confronts it head one but only avoids it by
> positing some kind of supernatural consciousness and appealing directly to
> animism and teleology. 
> 
> There is nothing to stop you from being wrong if you wish but it would be
> nice if you could rationalize your choice a little better than appealing to
> something as vague as "lots of very intelligent people".

Did you deliberately omit Pirsig?


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/