Quote:
Originally Posted by mickthinks
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm
Since there is no subjective or objective functional distinction between the two, EP must yield to the razor because it postulates a superfluous and wholly unverifiable or unfalsiable claim that adds nothing to our understanding of life and death.
|
EP is a postulate, David. It certainly seems unverifiable as yet, but I'm not sure that is the fatal scientific flaw you suggest. After all, the same "adds nothing to our understanding" objection might have been made in 1865 of Maxwell's electromagnetic wave postulate. |
The subjective distinction is continuance, albeit without persistence of individuation.
And who expects scientific verification of his ontologic view, anyway? It's no more possible for davidm's view than for the essay view.
Plus davidm's view of unfelt time-gaps remains
inconsistent, unlike the essay view. How could an inconsistent view be true?