On Friday, April 29, 2011 8:22:17 AM UTC-4, ornamentalmind wrote:
Rethinking it, perhaps you are asking about physicality? I just don't
know for sure...sorry. In either case Ash, perhaps you could be real
specific in the question. These epistemological and ontological issues
get very deep very quickly and countless books have been written about
even small aspects of these larger issues.
Sorry to jump the gun on you OM, I was hoping that instead of going back and forth with "yes it is" "no it isn't" for several posts you could get a competing assertion on the table. The suspense was killing me. I am willing to do the foot in mouth routine if I've stepped on the dialogue here, it is known that I can be inept at the social interplay and dance.
"But neuron(s) firing is." [a thought] - CB
No, it isn't.- OM
I think this pair of assertions has appeared at least twice in a row now, Chuck has provided his initial rationale for this assertion and I would like to know what is behind your. That's all.
On Apr 29, 5:11 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmind...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ash, first it would be helpful if you included a small snippet of the
> specific post you are addressing for clarity's sake. This way we know
> more of what you are responding to.
> In this particular case, I'm guessing you are asking me something
> about thinking right? Not being sure, I'll await a specific question.
> On Apr 28, 7:57 pm, Ash <ashk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Can you provide a better explanation OM? Not just the point but a useful bit
> > to put this in perspective. It is obvious that you have something in mind,
> > someone should ask..