There is no punch line. If you've missed the substance of what I've said, do yourself a favour and get a copy of Plantinga's Warrant and Proper Function.Revolutionary wrote:If I whacked you over the head with a shovel, I'm sure that we could both agree that the mass that makes up that shovel is a solid "faculty" to conduct our basis of observation..... I wouldn't however argue that gravity was the cause behind it! Well, not unless we indulge in the definition of gravity!
Now, if we're done trying to be witty, if you desire to enter the discussion, can you begin by actually addressing something?I keep waiting for a punch line.... Do you have a point or are we going to begin creating a fantastical arena like a matrix? Oh what fun!K wrote:Address something? Like I did with my first post while you yourself were attempting to play the "witty" one.
Sorry, it was not my intention to rain on your parade. But, you miss the point, but it was quite sharp so can't expect dullness to pick up on it. Again, I apologise... I'm really not witty though you see it. I'll leave you be the witty one.
Nonetheless, to observe requires an observer which is more than mere mass. To observe correctly, requires faculties that are tuned into the truth. Observing faculties evolved by chance, built primarily for survival rather than truth... so how is it we know what we know is true. Re: Mass, such is not concerned with matters of truth, let alone what is morally good or bad. It has not intentions to do this or that. Mass, is simply mass.
And no, that isn't an Christian apologetical book, but rather a hard and thoughtful philosophy in the area epistemology.
I'll leave you to your cake. Sorry if you felt I stole I piece. It just takes talking some sense I suppose. (please put that shovel down!)