Re: Relational "Space"

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:*** Behalf Of Judith
> Rosen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:44 PM
> To: ***
> Subject: Re: Relational "Space"
>
>
> Regarding Tim's comment, below:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Gwinn" <***>
> > On the other hand, since by definition we cannot directly perceive this
> > primary structure, then is there strong reason to even postulate its
> > existence?
>
> The ancient Greeks came up with a theory of atomic structure long before
> humanity achieved the level of technology to verify that atoms
> were, indeed,
> the building blocks of all matter.

Judith,

But if phenomenon = conformation, then primary structure alone, apart from
conformation, is not a phenomenon and hence not perceivable. That is what I
mean by "by definition". In this case it would not be a technological issue.

On the other hand, I suppose that it is an unnecessary a priori restriction
on the material world to say that primary structure *must* not be
perceivable, merely because of such a definition.

Regards,
Tim