Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tame
I'd rather reason through this than appeal to "authority". Many authorities disagree on this, so I would like to reason with you directly.

All right, reason it out. I propose as a "scientific" belief that all rivers have an invisible nymph that looks after the river. This is, in principle, something that cannot be tested. Now, you're a scientist, and you want to make your mark on the world by working on "nymph theory." Whatcha gonna do with this "theory"? What's your first move?

66 posted on 04/06/2003 3:31:07 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry
What's your first move?

My first move is to ask a simple question:

What evidence or warrant is there to suggest the invisible nymph is there?

It's not that the invisible nymph isn't possible. It's just that I am not inclined to believe such a nymph exists without something more than your statement concerning the matter.

74 posted on 04/06/2003 3:50:20 PM PDT by tame
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson