🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <schiller.726827765@hpas5> schiller@prl.philips.nl (schiller c) writes:
>
>Obviously I embrace the idea that no theory is necessary. (This is to
>make you angry a little more ... :-) The historical account even prooves
>this to be so.

Indeed, you embrace ideas as if they were low-rent prostitutes, uncritically,
without regard to their background or provenance, thinking as little as
possible so as to avoid the unwanted truth of the matter. 
>
[Ill-conceived gibbering deleted]
>
>I also subscribe to the idea that every theoretical term (such as
>'alpha particle', 'mass', 'charge', etc.) is simply *shorthand* for
>observations. This is the way physics and the other sciences have grown
>and have been developed. 

Have you even read any of the posts directed at you on this topic? Or, for
that matter ANYTHING relevant to this topic?  You began this converstaion
with a set of inconsistent and ill-defined ideas, and have responded to 
every comment on them with a reassertion of those ideas, held as if by
unreasoning religious faith: "It is my position that...", "I embrace the
theory that...", "I subscribe to the idea that..."

Please, embrace what or whomever you wish, but don't feel obligated to
garb your peculiar illusions in the trappings of a reasoned position.  It shows
more about your ability to reason than about the ill-considered attitudes to
which you cling.
-- 
===========================================================
Dan Cohen                         danco@philos.umass.edu
                                  danco@titan.ucc.umass.edu
===========================================================