|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Mark EarnestMark Earnest Date: Aug 1, 2008 22:22
Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
If reality came first, then surely it is more important than the world we
now see.
If the universe came first, then maybe what we see is all there is.
So...
...in your view, what is the difference between reality and the universe?
|
| |
|
| | 31 Comments |
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: Aug 1, 2008 22:47
On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:22:37 -0500, "Mark Earnest" yahoo.com> wrote:
>Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
>
>If reality came first, then surely it is more important than the world we
>now see.
>
>If the universe came first, then maybe what we see is all there is.
>
>So...
>
>...in your view, what is the difference between reality and the universe?
>
It may be, that your phrase "came first", does not apply or has no
descriptive effect. The situation is far weirder than we can consider,
thus our epistemology is powerless. Even analogies are powerless.
Of course you may confabulate any story you wish, don't expect
any of them to have anything more than entertainment value.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: Aug 1, 2008 23:04
On Aug 2, 1:47 am, Sir Frederick fuzzysys.com> wrote:> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:22:37 -0500, "Mark Earnest" yahoo.com> wrote:>>Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
>
>>If reality came first, then surely it is more important than the world we
>>now see.
>
>>If the universe came first, then maybe what we see is all there is.
>
>>So...
>
>>...in your view, what is the difference between reality and the universe?
>
> It may be, that your phrase "came first", does not apply or has no
> descriptive effect. The situation is far weirder than we can consider,
> thus our epistemology is powerless. Even analogies are powerless.
> Of course you may confabulate any story you wish, don't expect
> any of them to have anything more than entertainment value...
|
| Show full article (1.04Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: Aug 1, 2008 23:31
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:04:51 -0700 (PDT), turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 1:47 am, Sir Frederick fuzzysys.com> wrote:>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:22:37 -0500, "Mark Earnest" yahoo.com> wrote:>>>Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or...
|
| Show full article (1.17Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: Aug 1, 2008 23:50
On Aug 2, 2:31 am, Sir Frederick fuzzysys.com> wrote:> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:04:51 -0700 (PDT), turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:>>On Aug 2, 1:47 am, Sir Frederick fuzzysys.com> wrote:>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:22:37 -0500, "Mark Earnest" yahoo.com> wrote:>>>>Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
>
>>>>If reality came first, then surely it is more important than the world we
>>>>now see.
>
>>>>If the universe came first, then maybe what we see is all there is.
>
>>>>So...
>
>>>>...in your view, what is the difference between reality and the universe?
>
>>> It may be, that your phrase "came first", does not apply or has no
>>> descriptive effect. The situation is far weirder than we can consider,
>>> thus our epistemology is powerless. Even analogies are powerless.
>>> Of course you may confabulate any story you wish, don't expect
>>> any of them to have anything more than entertainment value. ...
|
| Show full article (1.37Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: Aug 2, 2008 02:57
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:50:55 -0700 (PDT), turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 2:31 am, Sir Frederick fuzzysys.com> wrote:>> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:04:51 -0700 (PDT), turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:>>>On Aug 2, 1:47 am, Sir Frederick
|
| Show full article (1.75Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ZerkonXZerkonX Date: Aug 2, 2008 04:43
On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:22:37 -0500, Mark Earnest wrote:
> Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
If you want to make this a problem of linear sequence.. whatever came
before reality would not be reality so..
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: THE BORGTHE BORG Date: Aug 2, 2008 05:00
> Which is more basic, which came first...reality, or the universe?
>
> If reality came first, then surely it is more important than the world we
> now see.
>
> If the universe came first, then maybe what we see is all there is.
>
> So...
>
> ...in your view, what is the difference between reality and the universe?
>
|
| Show full article (1.23Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: THE BORGTHE BORG Date: Aug 2, 2008 05:07
Yes we did visit Earth and no our visit was NOTHING to do with humans.
So no we did not prove ourselves to you.
Amazing how you are SO stupid that you seem to think everyone else is as
stupid as you?
Wonder why you do this.
Maybe because you are so stupid.
I wonder if Don Stockbauer has his head up a cow's ass to see if he can find
the global brain there eh?
Or maybe Mark Earnest is putting out roast beef and yorkshire pudding for
angels that have flesh and bodies eh?
THE BORG
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: THE BORGTHE BORG Date: Aug 2, 2008 05:14
Incidentally there were some REAL Angels - of the spirit and not the flesh
and who were indeed all male and we did rescue them also.
They were very sick and ill at watching the behaviour of humans.
But as you have some nice women who eat cake and orange and appear in the
flesh and you are quite happy with these and you genuinely think they are
angels then you will not miss them eh?
THE BORG
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
