Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,sci.psychology,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.bio,sci.philosophy.meta,rec.arts.books
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!miner.usbm.gov!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV!fnnews.fnal.gov!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!usenet
From: rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley)
Subject: Re: Roger Penrose's New Book (in HTML) 1.0
In-Reply-To: ch@chch.demon.co.uk's message of Fri, 18 Nov 1994 00:47:22 +0000
Message-ID: <RJC.94Nov18200946@daiches.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: daiches
Organization: Human Communication Research Centre, University of Edinburgh
References: <JMC.94Oct23231211@white.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il> <39drsi$7nl@crl10.crl.com>
	<39m0di$b69@onramp.arc.nasa.gov> <Cz2F9G.IHA@beaux.atwc.teradyne.com>
	<785119642snz@chch.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 20:09:46 GMT
Lines: 20
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:100727 sci.skeptic:95611 sci.psychology:29998 comp.ai.philosophy:22252 sci.bio:23191 sci.philosophy.meta:14847

In article <785119642snz@chch.demon.co.uk>, Charles Bryant (cb) writes:

cb> It is futile to even attempt to discuss phenomena which are not
cb> 'independent of the observer'. If a phenomenon is dependent on the
cb> observer then each person must investigate it for themselves and
cb> discussion of it is pointless. 

Why? As a trivial example, imagine a phenomenon which was different
depending on whether measured by a man or a woman, such would
certainly not be independent of observer. Would it be pointless to
discuss that? Would it even be pointless to discuss it with a member
of the oposite sex (so that you could understand how the world looked
to them)?

Ever told anyone what colour something is? People's colour perception
varies. 

--
rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk			_O_
					 |<
