Closing the antecedent

[John Jones]

Realism and anti-realism, the 'external' world and 'inner' world, are
alike in that neither of these philosophies can support as necessities
the notions of order and disorder, or their related notions such as
antecedence, sequence, beginning, end, randomness, probability and
chaos. Nor can logic and mathematics provide us with any examples. Any
demonstration of these notions can be reformulated in a such way that
renders them impotent. For example, if I speak and you reply,
antecedence and sequence are eliminated as a 'communication'. Events,
any event, such as the creation of the universe, are closed or opened,
not started, begun or finished.

We are forced, if we wish to retain these concepts, to find a
framework, theory or philosophy that can support them. It would be a
mark of a greater philosophy not to do so.

[William Elliot]

No problem, surrealism is better than both realism and anti-realism.

[John Jones]

William Elliot wrote:

> On Sun, 28 May 2006, John Jones wrote:
> > Realism and anti-realism, the 'external' world and 'inner' world, are
> > alike in that neither of these philosophies can support as necessities
> > the notions of order and disorder,

> No problem, surrealism is better than both realism and anti-realism.

You ignored the familiar objects of mathematics, and, the familiar
objects of Surrealism use familiar objects from realism and
anti-realism and is ambiguous as to their common ground.

[William Elliot]

If only that color had a smell instead of a sound, but no your drabness,
that color hadn't disable it's hyper-commercial smarts unable to surmount
blahdumb to the extent of contemplating a possible wow, much a less now
zong or a blushing two pronged schizophrenic virtuality.

Who's your dad? Reality, surreality for virtuality?

[John Jones]

Your zing wow is indistinguishable from your blah doh.

[William Elliot]

With sufficient discernment you'll see likewise your real -
anti-real duality is indistinguishable from dao dabbling.