How is the thing in itself an explanation?
Isnt that like saying a car is because “a car”? What does that mean?
If not God, then what?
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
How is the thing in itself an explanation?
Isnt that like saying a car is because “a car”? What does that mean?
If not God, then what?
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
I am not saying the rules are subjective. (In fact that they are objective is the point) I am saying the feeling that they require some explanation may be subjective. Although actually I find it difficult to understand the view that they don’t require explanation.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Morph you’re one of the ones who think WT has found a sustainable alternative model based on real estate or some such? And you puts words in my mouth I never said. Need I say more?
Crow, it seems to me the rules of the universe call for some sort of explanation. If you don’t think so, there’s little point arguing about it. It’s like arguing whether the sunset is beautiful. If you don’t feel it, then you can’t be convinced to feel it.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Why does reality exist in such a way that there is the relationship we call Pi?
Reality seems to be strained through a sort of order that calls out for an explanation.
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6314606905524224/piano-inevitable
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Why is Pi the value it is and not some other value? Could it be otherwise? To me God is the one for whom even these building blocks of reality are not taken for granted.
Where is the equivocation?
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
I shouldn't mind not being taken seriously. It's less pressure. But I'd be interested what you find objectionable about the question. I can only imagine you considered it to be out of place, context or in some sense rude. But to me it's one of the most profound issues I keep coming back to. Mathematical relationships are arguably the purest kinds of unconstructed concepts available to us. They appear to exist independently of us and our awarenss of them. Where did they come from, if not from God? The idea that such laws can just exist of themselves and require no explanation seems unsatisfying somehow. An "inch" on the other hand, is straightforwardly constructed, and I can't find the enthusiasm to press the point, when it seems so obvious. So I'm more interested in Pi than an inch, hence the abrupt turn.
l have researched this subject and come to the conclusion that no we didn't.what do others think?.
Not just the moon. I met a man on Sauchiehall Street who's been to other planets. He gave me a booklet. I've not read it yet.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
An inch of what?
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Somehow we're back on the topic of various perspectives on the earth's shape! But the important point is that we are capable of seeing the same thing differently.