Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!usenet
From: usenet@ucbvax.ARPA (USENET News Administration)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Purging Stoll and his kind
Message-ID: <10478@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 27-Sep-85 03:14:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10478
Posted: Fri Sep 27 03:14:08 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Sep-85 07:35:54 EDT
References: <2172@ukma.UUCP> <813@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP> <272@bbncc5.UUCP> <10437@ucbvax.ARPA> <239@graffiti.UUCP>
Reply-To: tedrick@ucbernie.UUCP (Tom Tedrick)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 39

In article <239@graffiti.UUCP> peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>> I thought that Godel's incompleteness theorems, Quantum
>> physics and such had blown scientific materialism out of
>> the water, at least as far as being a "true" description
>> of the world.
>
>Unfortunately no-one never claimed that it's the "true" description of
>the world. All we can say is that so far it works, unlike any other
>model of the world that I've ever heard of. Of course choosing a model
>based on "what works" is part of SM in the first place, but what better
>criteria fo you have?

I'm not so sure that noone ever claimed scientific materialism
is a true description of the world. (Isn't something along
those lines part of Marxist doctrine?) But anyway basically what
I was trying to say is that it is a good model (actually quite
an amazingly good model), but that it should be understood as
being a model rather than truth. As you say, choosing a model
based on what works is part of what SM is all about, as I
understand it.

My particular pet theory which I've been trying to integrate
with existing models is rather controversial and has to do
with adding as an axiom the existence of a soul, without saying
anything about God, religion etc. Since this is somewhere
out in left-field as far as most people are concerned I
won't burden you with the details ... (this view is
heretical both to religious and materialistic types ...)
What I like about Godel's theorems, Quantum physics, etc.,
is that they seem to suggest something mysterious is going
on that isn't readily explainable. I like mysteries ...

Apologies to the readers for burdening them with my personal
opinions ... I won't put any more of this in the net.

	       -Tom
		tedrick@berkeley

(Organization: The UnPowerful Elite)