Re: "Simplifying the simple"
odd...
Paul Andrew Bourne, MSc. (candidate); BSc. (Hons); Dip. Edu., seems to have disappeared from the conversation.
in case he to returns, i would like to note that if he wishes to place his 'title' before each post, it might be advisable to have someone go over the post and correct the grammar prior to entering it!
For example:
paul andrew bourne wrote:By Paul Andrew Bourne, MSc. (candidate); BSc. (Hons); Dip. Edu.
Society members have come to accept those things that they socialized to recognized as is. In history, the ontology was that the world was flat and that was a truth. After the discovery made by Christopher Columbus, the truth that the world was flat changes to that it is round. The truth that we have come to accept may one day be falsified by more discoveries. Therefore, an antology is not limited by time, space or any other magnitude because it is so. Many of the things that we have come to appreciate and accept within our defined space is supported by the acedemics of the date. If and when more findings refute those positions of the day that situation give rise to an anomaly. When more academics study this irregularities, this gives rise to new theorizing.
It follows, therefore, that many of the things that hold true today are not real but socially constructed because of time and space, and the availability of resources that are available to man. The word water is socially construct, that is it was given it name by man. As such, how are we absolute sure water is water? This same theorizing can be used to apply to other things within our socialized space.
try:
Members of society have come to accept those things that they are socialized to recognized as is. In history, the ontology was that the world was flat and that was a truth. After the discovery made by Galileo, the truth, that the world was flat, was changed to it's being round. The truth that we have come to accept, may one day be enlightened by further discoveries. Therefore, an ontology (or anthology?) is not limited by time, space or any other factor because it is so. Many of the things that we have come to appreciate and accept, within our defined space, are supported by the current academics. If and when more findings refute those positions, that will give rise to an anomaly. More academics studying these irregularities will give rise to new theorizing.............etc. etc.
there is still very little content, but it would be nice if it could be read and understood.
It's like being on a tread mill, the ground passes by, the buildings and clouds pass by etc., but there's no one going no where.
Think about it.
