The explanation of infinity I always liked was the one where you have an infinite hotel with an infinite amount of rooms. You can then accommodate any number of guests and still have plenty of space for more arrivals :cool:
Printable View
The explanation of infinity I always liked was the one where you have an infinite hotel with an infinite amount of rooms. You can then accommodate any number of guests and still have plenty of space for more arrivals :cool:
My initial thought was an infinite fellrace would be great (infinite amount of prizes, infinite choice of beer at the infinite bar etc) but then I realised you could end up infinitely lost (no change there then!) and you'd never get to the end! :(:eek:
Well I agree it is a method of control. The question is, is the control necessary? Maybe not for those who dwell long enough on things to work them out in a pragmatic and humanistic way. But what about those who don't? Those who don't give a rats ass about any kind of organised anything?
Isn't Dawkins a VERIFICATIONIST - he holds a "scientific mindset" which rejects anything not empirically verifiable. Problem is that tends to make everything a bit dull and boring: it's all the things that can't be verified that give life meaning. Perhaps Albert Einstein put it better:
"The fairest thing we can experince is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and science. He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead, a snuffed out candle" :eek:
Not for me he doesn't - good luck to the believers.
If God did exist, wouldn't he have got round to sorting out all those cheats who don't carry the compulsory kit in races?
Science is a point of view.