Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Significance of consciousness
Message-ID: <D5LI8q.KK1@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bute.aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
References: <D4vMrs.2IG@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <D515Ly.K38@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <D52z28.Mwo@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 17:36:26 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <D52z28.Mwo@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:
>In article <D515Ly.K38@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,
>Jeff Dalton <jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>In article <D4vMrs.2IG@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:
>>>Newton proposed his theory of gravitation he had problems with the fact that 
>>>his theory implied "interaction at a distance", which went against the above
>>>mentioned "common-sense" notion. Which has turned out to be false - his theory
>>>or "common-sense" (the most primitive experiences)?
>>
>>His theory.
>
>Right, and Earth is flat too.

So you think Newton's theory was true?  That nothing needed to be
explained about "action at a distance"?  That the people who developed
later theories of gravitation wasting their time?

BTW, your argument against folk notions (if you defned that, you must
think the Earth is flat too) isn't much worse than what eliminativist
philosophers have advanced against "folk psychology".




