Re: virus: Re: Objects all in a row

Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:16:13 +0100


In message <19981008192939.AAA27969@[128.103.64.145]>, Wade T.Smith
<wade_smith@harvard.edu> writes
>>It does not exist in the objective
>>world, being rather that for which the objective world
>>exists.
>
>Well, this is the core of my discontent.
>
>How can anything be said not to exist in the objective world- where the
>'objective world' is the universe?

No, the objective world is the world of objects as
perceived by we subjects. To assume that "objective
world" = "the universe" is to beg the question, to
assume the consequent. Depending, of course, on
what you mean by "universe" -- I've been taking it to
mean "all that is", in which case it certainly does
not equate to "the objective world", because that, by
definition, excludes subjects.

>And this- "that for which the objective world exists" is indeed a
>statement of the supernatural- that which is 'other' to the universe.

Nope, only other to the objective world. (And not
even that, given the Klein Bottle analogy. BTW, if
you do a web search on "Klein Bottle", you get some
fascinating stuff!)

>And as far as I know, clothes have to be made of materials.

So you have to be a materialist to use materials?
Try telling that to the cathedral builders!

-- 
Robin