> >Actually I meant "consistent" in the logical sense, as in non-contradictory.
> >So, substituting...
> >
> >1. For all observers using the same definitions, any true statement about
> >reality will not contradict other true statements about reality.
>
> Now we assume we know what is "true". In order to use logic we have to
> agree on some terms and their meaning. The PCR and "maybe" camps may
> question the truth itself. How do we define "truth"?
Speak for your own camp, Tad.
"Truth" is defined by the David's postulate itself as "Statements about
reality that do not contradict each other for observers using the same
definitions"
The "maybes" don't have a problem with that. When we have the same
definitions, that is.
-Prof. Tim