[MJA]

Originally Posted by Graybeard

Dear MJA .... As you provide nothing in your profile to the contrary I can only assume that I am debating with someone who knows almost nothing about the rules of debate. No doubt you think that Authors should be judged only by the quality of their writings. That their writings should stand alone. That ALL is EQUAL.

Don't be frightened, put your stats out there. Schoolgirl, Professor or Zealot, don't be ashamed of your position.

The first thing you need to learn is to read what the other person wrote before replying. Robert has placed a link in the rules of this forum that would benefit you enormously. It has certainly benefited me.

Here is the link that Robert has provided on fallacious arguments that should be avoided if possible. I have been guilty of many infringements myself.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Your quote comes under the very first one on the list 'Red Herring'

Why? ........ Do I really need to tell you?

Ok ... Listen up ..


Mary knows all about COLOUR in all its variety and diversity ONLY thru her noumena.

Mary has experienced only TWO colours thru her Phenomena.

When Mary leaves the room for the first time she experiences a Third, Fourth, Fifth, etc colours thru her senses which detect Phenomena only.

These experiences were not available to her thru her Noumena, even though she is an expert on colour.

RED has nothing to do with it, you have turned RED into a RED HERRING.

OBVIOUSLY colour is NOT self-evident as you imply. It NEEDS to be a experienced which can only be done by PHENOMENA.

Do you get it?.... Do you see why your reply is fallacious?

Now you take care good buddy (or little missy)....

cool bananas ... greg

PS: Of course we can an always settle this in the Arcade, where Men are Men and Alpha-Males roam free.

Dear Greg,

Thanks for you interest in me and my profile, I'll try to answer your query.

I am simply the true searcher who asked the question: is nature measurable?
I am certain I have found the truth of that question, the truth of nature, and the truth of measure.

I have absolutely no interest in debate or arguement,
I do believe that once the truth is found it must be shared.
If you are not interested in the truths I share, perhaps it would be best if you not respond.

With regard to the appropriateness of my questioning the true measure of red, I know that the answer to that question lead to TOE. If you find my questions to difficult, or arguementative, I can assure you, it was not my intent.

But for you, I will rephrase the questions of the truth of measure of red.

You state: "Obviously colour is not self-evident," and " it needs to be experienced which can only be done by phenomena."

Without falacy, arguement or debate, and only a question to help me understand your view of reality or truth, my revised question is in your own words:

If oneself does not experience the evidence or phenomena of color, does color not exist?
If it does exist, then is your statement still correct?
If it does not exist for the lack of experience of oneself, what about nature, what about everyone else?

=
MJA

ps: I don't think real or true alpha male men call others names, or play games when it come to the search for truth, do you Greg?