Occam's razor can be presented as a heuristic maxim: do not use more
than you need. It may be that it can be usefully complemented: do not
discard more than you have to. For an example consider how division by
zero has always been treated. If it is allowed it leads to
inconsistency. But we do not discard either zero or division. We just
rule that the function divide by is not defined on the argument zero.
The second maxim might be useful in set theory where a distinction
is made between sets and classes and some operations are permitted on
sets and forbidden on classes. This seems an unnecessarly sweeping way
of avoiding paradox and inconsistency. It may only be necessary to
recognise that some functions including predicates cannot be given
domains quite as big as we at first think they...

A room with a view is a room with a view, whether or not there is a viewer.

Then let's be bold. Objects are made real, ontologically and logically,
by a view. This isn't the quaint idea of a quantum world collapsing into
physical form by a view, nor is it psychologism where an individual's
'beliefs' contribute to a phenomenal world.

Thus, or for the cautious 'for example', a universe of one object cannot
realise that object for there is no view or framework in which the
object can possibly be presented. The only justification we can make for
a solitary object is to claim that it views itself, or else to suppose a
supernatural viewer. This idea is known as transcendental realism and is
an implicit foundation for all logics and sciences.

It is for this reason that I argue that logic and science are either
supernaturalisms or psychologisms, where the viewer, historically
presented as God, has been anthropomorphised and rendered invisible. For
these studies the viewer is ever-present, yet never 'seen', never
questioned. The consequences of questioning 'the view' can be dramatic,
if the explorer of knowledge wishes to travel that far.

Muslims, to the extent that they were even on the planes, were
patsies.
What you thought was true is proven untrue.

http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/911Logic.html
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/911.html

On 28 May, 03:51, "shuai.wang.zju" gmail.com> wrote:

I don't know, perhaps the word 'money' describes a lot....and that
which
it can't we can pay someone else to do it, heh? ;)