From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!cronkite.Central.Sun.COM!newstop!exodus!appserv!orfeo.Eng.Sun.COM!silber Mon Dec  9 10:48:01 EST 1991
Article 1860 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!cronkite.Central.Sun.COM!newstop!exodus!appserv!orfeo.Eng.Sun.COM!silber
>From: silber@orfeo.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Silber)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Daniel D in the lion's den
Message-ID: <1240@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 27 Nov 91 22:10:18 GMT
References: <32905@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1991Nov21.005355.5696@husc3.harvard.edu> <1164@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> <1991Nov27.144726.5963@husc3.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Lines: 33

In article <1991Nov27.144726.5963@husc3.harvard.edu> zeleny@boucher.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:
>Do you understand the difference between a material property and a material
>object?  Do you understand that my argument in no way depends on
>reification of physical properties?  Do you know what ontological
>commitment is?  Do you understand this question?

 Well shucks, Massa Mickey, sure, a 'material prope'ty', why I reckon
 that's a attribute; Now since, I only access this here forum
 between cycles, so to speak, I cain't recollect your entire argument,
 not mindlessly like the man in Johnnie's room, nor othe'wise, BUT,
 I kind o' do recollect somethin' y'all wrote about them natchural nummers,
 seems I recollect somethin like that you said:
 "7" cain't exist without that there's
 some big entailed transfinite induction or some such thang!  Well, I
 already done give my own hayseed answer t' that, Them Aieuls of ours
 way back when, even them Babylonians had sixes and sevens long b'fore
 Cantor.  The brain izzzz finite azzz f'r as I know and it thanks and
 izzz even conscious, even my poo' brain.  Now if y'all are agreein' that
 we can breathe consciousness into a finite set (of intercommunicating THANGS)
 without appealin to mysticism, well shucks we're all sayin' that then.
 But I got to go do my chores now Massa Mickey, but lemme jus' say,
 dumb sot that I am, I think a SET o' actual neurons in_a actual brain
 c'n do a heap more consciousness than any abstract-SET.

>'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`
>`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
>: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
>: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
>: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
>:                                                             so     :

 Par la theorie des ensembles, l'on a  fonde la grande et forte
 mathematique moderne, le bien aurait sans doute une autre origine


