I do want to keep up with the power and the subject debate but I have to
kick this Idea around.
How can F's method be trusted? He said himself that sciences only
contain but don't describe the phenomena they seek to explain. How is
F's method any more reliable than the physician's? It isn't. There are
an infinite number of variables that go into each geneology. F cannot
discover, nor take into account each of them. The reality is that
history is in a state of chaos, there are no rules of the game. The
rules are human inventions that we use to satisfy our craving to explain
the void. There is no reason why F is better that Hegel.
Also, how can I know that I percieve reality? All I can know is myself.
How do I know that anyone recieves this. It could just be my
imagination or a great deceiver, I could be in the Matrix.
There is no way I can see to come to conclusions from the study of
history.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
kick this Idea around.
How can F's method be trusted? He said himself that sciences only
contain but don't describe the phenomena they seek to explain. How is
F's method any more reliable than the physician's? It isn't. There are
an infinite number of variables that go into each geneology. F cannot
discover, nor take into account each of them. The reality is that
history is in a state of chaos, there are no rules of the game. The
rules are human inventions that we use to satisfy our craving to explain
the void. There is no reason why F is better that Hegel.
Also, how can I know that I percieve reality? All I can know is myself.
How do I know that anyone recieves this. It could just be my
imagination or a great deceiver, I could be in the Matrix.
There is no way I can see to come to conclusions from the study of
history.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com