[MD] Dualism and Eagleton's God Delusion

[ian glendinning]

Hi DMB, you said to David M.
"In that sense, potential realities and possible realities are never
real because if they are real then we can no longer rightly call them
possible or potential."

This is what I meant ... perhaps my use of the word "just" was ill
advised ... but this is the linguistic issue I see.

You / we agree on the substance of
things "potentially real"
things "real" and
things "potential"

You want to reserve the words real and potential as exclusive, and say
that potentially realities may be potential but never real (in the
sense you want to reserve for that word) even though as you say they
do "in some sense" refer to realities.

Ian

On 3/7/07, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
> David M said to DMB
> By the way, you have my respect whether you stick with your own view or,
> even more impressively,
> change your mind. If you have good reason to stick please make your case for
> your view or why you think mine is flawed. All down to where you want to
> draw the line real/non-real. I say it's all real, but what sort of real:
> static real, dynamic real, actual real, potential real, inner real, outer
> real, emerging real, repeating pattern real.
>
> dmb says:
> Yea, thanks Dave. Despite what you said, my disagreement here or anywhere
> else is not predicated on my dislike of you. You seem like a perfectly
> decent guy. But that doesn't keep me from thinking that your assertions
> about "the possible" are wrong. We apparently do agree that its all about
> what counts as real. That's my whole point. And your list of the different
> kinds of real is okay except for that same point of contention. Here you've
> used "potential real" instead of "the possible". But my objection is exactly
> the same. We can image the potential and that imagining is real. Both of
> these words refer to reality only insofar as they refer to the actual,
> present thoughts the future and not the future itself or the cause of its
> unfolding. In that sense, potential realities and possible realities are
> never real because if they are real then we can no longer rightly call them
> possible or potential. Then we'd say they were actualities and realizations.
> I explained this at greater length and posted it earlier today
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Play Flexicon: the crossword game that feeds your brain. PLAY now for FREE.
>  http://zone.msn.com/en/flexicon/default.htm?icid=flexicon_hmtagline
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>