science = determinism?
Peter da Silva
peter at abbnm.com
Wed Nov 24 02:02:12 EST 1999
In article <qzH_3.2656$X5.361122 at ptah.visi.com>,
Peter Seebach <seebs at plethora.net> wrote:
> In article <383B7214.6021 at compuserve.com>,
> Will Dwinnell <predictor at compuserve.com> wrote:
> >Science is the study of reality. If reality is found to contain some
> >random  component, then shouldn't the above assumption be labeled dogma
> >and the insistence on that assumption be 'religious'?
> No. If reality is found to contain some random component, we'll throw the
> result out and try again.
I'd like my new reality in teal with cinnamon piping, Doctor Heisenberg.
 The original phrase in the message Will followed up to was "non-
In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva <peter at baileynm.com>
`-_-' Ar rug tú barróg ar do mhactíre inniu?
'U` "And now, little kittens, we're going to run across red-hot
motherboards, with our bare feet." -- Buzh.
More information about the Neur-sci