dimreepr

You may not get the joke, but not every request for the truth demands a lie.

Unless you're Kanye West...

Maybe not but pigeons were trained as a guidance system.

Although I'm unsure how one can stand parallel with the wall if only one foot and shoulder is pressed against it?

I succeeded on the 2nd attempt (had to adjust my balance), but I've yet to levitate.

You can't draw that line, that's the whole point.

Are you serious? If they aren't infallible how do you know you aren't dribbling and muttering into the pillow of your padded cell? Those that are, also have workable senses...

What's the big deal? Why do you have to be right so badly? I don't think any of the posters, in this thread, looks around them constantly wondering if what they perceive is real. it's real enough. I can't prove it (I don't have too), but you've yet to provide a single scrap of evidence that 'our senses are infallible', and since your entire argument, rests on that statement, I think it's time you start.

They are the space they occupy

Stop relying on others, think for yourself. I doubt that, did you present it in the correct context? Otherwise, you damn straight he was wrong.

I wouldn't want to go that deep; just deep enough, for understanding to occur.

They aren't variables, it's the field in which variables happen.

No, of course it's not, FTFY

You've missed the point of his, intention, using the word I've underlined.

Clearly...

This thread would suggest otherwise.

Again, you conflate: Neither, reality is something you can only glimpse; look, it really doesn't matter how hard you, or I, want it to be true; a mathematical model can only ever be an approximation.

There you go again, you conflate the two sentences in order to twist the focus knob again. It's obvious what I meant: It's far far from obvious what you meant, in the sentence I quoted.

It doesn't matter how often, or finely, you change the focus, you can never see reality. I don't understand, is that meant to mean, lost in space or lost in meaning?

Sorry, I've misread your post, so please disregard mine.

Mostly because you've been arguing the opposite up till now, you can't have it both ways whatever you do with the goal.

Anything that follows this, is empty gesturing.

But then that's when philosophy comes to the for; if I lack your language, all I have is empathy.

Even easier when one doesn't speak the language.

Fair enough, I was caught up in the solipsism question.