[MD] Words and Metaphysical Mysticism.

[David Harding]

Hi Dan,

> Dan:
> Well, this is what you said:
> 
> "... with enough observation, and the right type of experiment which
> removes all distractions it would be safe to make a conclusion about
> which parts of the brain lighting up relate to a particular
> thought.."
> 
> Sounds pretty 'safe' to say the conclusion is set in concrete, no?

No, not really.  A 'concrete' conclusion is one that doesn't change.  As we both know, the MOQ doesn't make such a claim about anything - including scientific conclusions.  But that doesn't mean that conclusions aren't as valuable as they always were either..  I thinks it's good to use the best scientific conclusion until a better one comes along.

> David H;
>> Too many scientists?
> 
> Dan:
> I'd say one too many, yes. :)

Err, okay? You don't approve of my talking with Mark?

> Dan:
> Did I say that? No, looking back over my post I did not. It is only
> when those who claim to be that which they obviously are not that
> "scientists" are no good. Science is wonderful.

Oh I see… Well to avoid any further conclusion, I value genuine scientists as well..  You at least value scientists who are such yes? 

-David.