送交者: gyro 于 2009-09-02, 12:23:32:

• 好像写过 (无内容) - Amsel (0 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:04:49 (361490)
  • I mean in the current series of big scientific debates in history. (无内容) - gyro (0 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:16:30 (361492)
• 照你这么说，从哲学上看，这看到原子的聚焦过程跟FLG人员聚精会神看到肚子里的轮子 - @ (234 bytes) 2009-09-02, 12:29:23 (361469)
  • "从哲学上看", there is no change whatsoever - gyro (73 bytes) 2009-09-02, 12:32:04 (361471)
    • 请别玩三级跳，照顾一下非哲学人士。还是请先把“聚焦”问题 - @ (78 bytes) 2009-09-02, 12:38:04 (361472)
      • Not the same. - gyro (283 bytes) 2009-09-02, 12:44:37 (361475)
        • can't the scientific methods of the focusing process - @ (227 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:04:15 (361489)
          • That is happening all the time - gyro (104 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:12:39 (361491)
            • 果如此，可不可以这样看呢：科学发现的球越大，其和未知的 - @ (12 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:31:56 (361494)
              • The way I said it - gyro (168 bytes) 2009-09-02, 15:49:48 (361520)
              • 瞧你，一用这个熟知的比喻， 那么高深的话题被你庸俗了 - gyro (59 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:35:48 (361495)
                • As long as it works, never changes。 - @ (78 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:48:12 (361497)
                  • 我从来不否定哲学的价值，至少可以看作是一种艺术。但像田野那样 - @ (187 bytes) 2009-09-02, 14:11:17 (361498)
        • thx. (无内容) - @ (0 bytes) 2009-09-02, 12:57:42 (361485)
          • thx. (无内容) - gyro (0 bytes) 2009-09-02, 13:01:17 (361488)

加跟贴