babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
If neither the man or the dog actually saw the deer, then how could the deer actually have existed. Sure, if you tell the story from the deer's point of view, it existed, but from the man/dog duo, the deer effectively never existed.
It's just a story. I prolly didn't retell it right, but I think it's a scenario that every deer hunter can imagine happening. Deer can be elusive and downright cagey and especially white tails here in Ontario. They can run you ragged and lose a hunter in so many ways. We like hunting from tree stands up here in the north for that reason. And that is an art in itself. My elder brother is a prolific deer hunter and has a few tricks of his own he refuses to share with other hunters. I know from my own experience that if they smell ya, you won't see hide nor hair of 'em. And after a few days of bad luck, you have to change spots cuz they likely know exactly where youve been laying in wait for them. All your cammy and religiously not showering for a week can be for nought.
Maybe, but you don't want to address the quantum implication of the reality of an object not directly observed.
I'm thinking we are replacing ourselves atom by atom every day and at varying rates. At some point we are not exact copies of the same physical people we were years before. And so if we are more than just individual sacks of atoms, then what makes us who we are? What part of MacktheKnife defines who you are? If a neurosurgeon was to cut the top of our head open and probe around for the part responsible for "I am", where exactly would he find it? The answer is they don't know. They know where memories are stored and where visual stimulus is decoded but not the part that sees the world through two eyes. They haven't a clue as to where "I am" hangs out.
lol, you make agnosticism sound so conclusive. For my part, it's a continuing journey rather than a particular destination. And I certainly don't find it particularly sensible.
Reserving judgement until the facts are known isn't sensible? Atheism and theism require a leap of faith, agnosticism recognizes we don't, and maybe never will, "know" the answer. How can that be anything but sensible.