Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Apr 12, 2023 7:55 am
Ok but then your words make no sense. If you understand how QM works, and you understand that there can be no talk of ontology when no measurement is being taken then how can you also say this?
How can VA say what he said or show pictures of what things look like when there's no measurement? There's the rub. It's a rub he created for himself. I certainly didn't ask him to. He just couldn't hold himself back from being a realist and lecturing. Or so it seems since it directly contradicted things he said and said many, many times.
How can VA "do" what QM doesn't allow him to do?
I'm not always sure what's intended, ironic or just a side product of our floppy language, but I think it's funny VA contradicts QM while appealing to it's authority. But sure, I don't think of QM as an agent, and certainly not one capable of stopping from doing silly things like that.
To "provide mind-independent knowledge" in QM is to violate QM. The request is unsatisfiable - it's the sort of request one poses to test if the other party is an idiot.
I haven't requested he do this. He did it on his own, Unasked for, at least by me. He did it, it seems, without realizing he was contradicting the entire point of his suddenly getting fascinated by qm, to support an anti-realism which he started talking about to because.....
I think the process is that someone raises on objection to something he says X. So, he finds [anything at all] to support his X. Or to attack their attack on X. He hasn't really thought through whatever he drags and an appeals to the authority of. So, then he has to find support of this. And along the way he's gathered a mass of positions, which may or may not fit him well, and may not fit his other positions well. I think he's a realist, but if he is this causes problems. In any case he writes as if he's a realist a lot of the time, sometimes even in support of his anti-realism.
IOW he really wants to tell us what things are like, period, objectively, even when we are not around to notice - wants to be and often is a realist
While needing for his battle with PH to deny there is an independent reality out there - entailing that realists are outmoded, anti-scientific poo poo heads.
So, despite this latter postion he throws realism at us, sometimes even when directly fighting realism.
When it's pointed out he shifts to something else.
He has often told us what things are like when we don't measure and when we are not around, when no observation was made, and has yes even provided images showing us what it's like when no one is looking. He could have managed to leave this out, and I didn't ask him to do this - and he doesn't read me anyway - but he did it, so I point it out.
Not that he reads what I post. I like the exercise. Why he doesn't read my posts I don't know. I haven't been as harsh as PH or FDP have been. Nor you for that matter in relation to him. I'd love to take that to mean I am just such a clever boy, but you've all raised just peachy objections and these have included may of the ones I've raised if not all of them.
But I enjoy his presence and now think he's a clear plus here. But his plans for the future, yechy poo poo. He's like the butterscotch ice cream of world reformers in my tastes.
