Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.atheism,alt.pagan,alt.consciousness,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism
From: ohgs@chatham.demon.co.uk (Oliver Sparrow)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!demon!chatham.demon.co.uk!ohgs
Subject: Re: rereRe: The end of god
References: <36vt2m$g6m@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca> <371epj$8gn@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <1994Oct12.133530.10573@cc.ic.ac.uk>
Organization: Royal Institute of International Affairs
Reply-To: ohgs@chatham.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 15
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 07:57:46 +0000
Message-ID: <782037419snz@chatham.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

Re. Euclidian completeness - Russell is rather good on this. Kant saw
geometery as the bridge between things which were observably true in the 
world of the senses and those things which could be derived ex ante, from
logical propositions. As Russell pointed out, almost immediately after he had 
done this, the non-Euclidian spaces (of eg Reimann) were developed, culminating 
in Albert E and his curving manifold of space time reducing poor old 
Euclid to a special case of an infinity of spaces and geometries. Now, of 
course, we know that Kant's goal is not a possible one and, frankly, not a very 
interesting one. How we perceive what it is that we can perceive; and how we 
know what it is that we can know; and how we can create and innovate from these 
bases is, in my view, where the nexus of interest now lies.
 _________________________________________________

  Oliver Sparrow
  ohgs@chatham.demon.co.uk
