NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164

[Paul Mackin]

On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 15:01, Ghetta Life wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
> >
> >The sense seems to be that Life's coming into being is in no way a
> >logical and predictable consequence of anything coming before.
> >Therefore, we should not rule out Afterlife simply because it is not a
> >logical and predictable consequence of life.
> 
> Yes, but he's using logic to come to this conclusion, reasoning about the 
> unreasonable.


Yes, it's a form of logic to conclude that we can't form definite ideas
about something we've not experienced.

However the "formal logic" Shade employs--the syllogism--is
intentionally bogus. other men die; but I/Am not another

The logic of teenage drivers.

I was mainly trying to escape from the in utero or pre-utero imagining
life before life began which seemed to be kind of a red herring. 

I liked the in vitro better. Can test tube babies remember that far
back?

P.