From: markp@elvis.wri.com (Mark Pundurs)
Subject: Re: After 2000 years, can we say that Christian Morality is
Nntp-Posting-Host: elvis.wri.com
Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
Lines: 28

In <30185@ursa.bear.com> halat@pooh.bears (Jim Halat) writes:

>In article <markp.735230393@elvis.wri.com>, markp@elvis.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes:

>>Omigod, it's an operationalist! Sorry, Jim, but the idea that a theory
>>explaining a myriad of distinctly different observations is merely a
>>"model" is more than sensible people can accept -- your phobia about
>>objective reality notwithstanding.

>First of all, I have no phobia of objective reality.  I'm simply
>saying that the scientific model of the atom is probably not 
>what is really out there.  I'm not saying that there's no object
>that sources these properties we measure from atomic theory.

You hadn't made that clear; I'm glad to have it clarified! So you're
a (physical) objectivist, after all, right?

>Take light as another example.  There are two theories: particle and
>wave.  Each one fails to predict the behavior of light as some point.
>So which is it: particle or wave?  You tell me.  You're the sensible
>one.

Wavicle! Next question? ;-)
--
Mark Pundurs

any resemblance between my opinions and those 
of Wolfram Research, Inc. is purely coincidental
