[MD] william James.

[Ian Glendinning]

Hi DMB,

(redundancy / unneccesary ridiculous kludge, whatever) ... I still
don't see how your James quote really relates to multiverse ideas.

Yes, clearly as you say
""The truth is too great for any one actual mind, even thought that
mind be dubbed 'the Absolute,' to know the whole of it. The facts and
worths of life need many cognizers to take them in. There is no point
of view absolutely public and universal." - James is saying that there
is no objective truth, no absolute reality. Life is too rich and thick
to be nailed down by any single view or perspective."

But, taking multiple viewpoints in the world is not the same as
suggesting that multiple worlds somehow physically exist
simultaneously. Perhaps you were just using the analogy - anyway
clearer now if that's all you were suggesting. (No argument that the
latter is indeed a scientific kludge, even if sometimes a useful
thought experiment for viewing possibilities.)

Ian

On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 3:37 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ian said:
>
> I can't see what it says to John's point about the redundancy ( non pragmatism ) of multiverses / many worlds ?
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> Did John have a point about redundancy?
>
> In any case, here is the basic idea: