Originally Posted by Kesh

I was going to reply to Brumsen, but I no longer see any point.

It's the same tired, circular reasoning, and "wooly talk" (as he put it) that I heard from so many philosophy students in class at college. Rather than actually attempting to find a solution to a problem, it was more important to them to "win" by talking the subject into the ground.

I understand philosophy. I've engaged enough professors on the subject and earned their respect. What Brumsen is doing is not philosophy, it is sophomoric argument for the sake of winning a debate.

I'm tired of it. I'll wait for the next thread where, hopefully, we can have an actual debate of the facts, instead of being asked to prove reality exists first. My .sig line still stands on that subject.