84309

神经网络昆斯林的新闻组分类2006

Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu talk.abortion:121471 alt.atheism:54090 talk.religion.misc:84309
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!wri!elvis.wri.com!markp
From: [e-mail] (Mark Pundurs)
Subject: Re: After 2000 years, can we say that Christian Morality is
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: elvis.wri.com
Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
References: <[e-mail]> <1qg8bu$[e-mail]> <1qgouk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 14:43:46 GMT
Lines: 27

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (mathew) writes:

>There's no objective physics; Einstein and Bohr have told us that.

Speaking as one who knows relativity and quantum mechanics, I say: 
Bullshit.

>There's no objective reality.  LSD should be sufficient to prove that.

Speaking as one who has taken LSD, I say: 
Bullshit.

>> One wonders just what people who ask such questions understand by the term 
>> "objective", if anything.

>I consider it to be a useful fiction; an abstract ideal we can strive
>towards.  Like an ideal gas or a light inextensible string, it doesn't
>actually exist; but we can talk about things as if they were like it, and not
>be too far wrong.

How could striving toward an ideal be in any way useful, if the ideal 
had no objective existence?
--
Mark Pundurs

any resemblance between my opinions and those 
of Wolfram Research, Inc. is purely coincidental