- #1
gushen
- 8
- 0
After 20 well-put questions about the several claims I made in this thread (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=98840), hypnagogue admin wrote:
Any strong attempts of justification would require several pages long. So I can only conclude that only mainstream theories and things that are common-sense in the scientific community are discussed here. Even though Philosophy should indeed present dubious claims if we want it to be considered as a true science.
I agree with your skepticism. But the meaningul part was yet to come, after a sufficient number of questions or comments would have been made. The subject I was talking about is actually an unified theory of perception that yields everything you can think about. So it's clear that, to reduce everything in a simple thread, lots of unclear claims are needed. Unclear, productive and meaningful are all concepts dependant of your perception, which was so easily offended.
Anyway I respect your point-of-view. I learned from your behaviour and will continue my book with a renewed view. Thank you.
Any strong attempts of justification would require several pages long. So I can only conclude that only mainstream theories and things that are common-sense in the scientific community are discussed here. Even though Philosophy should indeed present dubious claims if we want it to be considered as a true science.
I agree with your skepticism. But the meaningul part was yet to come, after a sufficient number of questions or comments would have been made. The subject I was talking about is actually an unified theory of perception that yields everything you can think about. So it's clear that, to reduce everything in a simple thread, lots of unclear claims are needed. Unclear, productive and meaningful are all concepts dependant of your perception, which was so easily offended.
Anyway I respect your point-of-view. I learned from your behaviour and will continue my book with a renewed view. Thank you.