[MD] Heads or tails?

[Krimel]

[Ian]
Am I are chiming in here to support the adoption of baseless claims ?
Whaddya think ? No, of course not, but a metaphysical "base" can never
be very firm or entirely provable / falsifiable itself. Every
metaphysics has a hole in it - I used to say - just some have bigger
holes than others.

There is a big pragmatic space (an excluded middle) between something
based in objective falsifiable logic, and something which is "a
literary exercise ... just a bunch of ideas [that] do not need to have
any contact with the world of experience ... require no criteria for
assessing them"

As a pragmatist, a metaphysical base is as good as the world model it
can support. It's as solid and the structures erected on top of it,
and no more. Causation is not a simple one-way affair.


[Krimel]
Sorry but it sure sounded like you were supporting baseless claims. Nor to I
see where the middle has been excluded. I see the polarity between truth and
clarity to be more of a sliding scale. You sacrifice some to get more of the
other.

How is causation more than a simple one-way affair?