Is Doug's chair really red?

["ROSSI JOHN" <rossi@nusc.navy.mil>]

     In the unlikely event this thing actually gets to Love-Hounds (I
haven't really been sure of the exact mailing address since Doug
moveds from Eddie to Gaffa), I would like to know how Doug actually
knows that Lionel Ritchie exists.  I mean, isn't it just as likely
that Ritchie as well as his music is one really bad halucination also.
If you look back at the foundations of the philosophy which was called
Pragmatism.  C. S. Pierce had a lot to say about reality and how it is
]defined.  One of the essential characteristics of "truth" is that it
be replicable and publicly verifiable.  That is, Doug is correct in his
assertion that we should consider it a fact that he sits in a red
chair if any of us would agree that his chair is, indeed, red after
looking at it.  It is quite likely that such verification would be
likely unless his chair is not saturated to the point where it can
would not be called any other color (e.g., orange, brown, etc).  Although
this is semantically similar to his postulation that agreement on
quality of subjective experience also constitutes "truth", it is, indeed,
quite different.  The meer fact that appreciation of quality remains
totally subjective, the experience can not really become a matter
of public demonstration (as is the color of his chair).  No matter how
many people agree on a subjective experience, such data do not
constitute "facts".  Subjective experience remains that.

As for the days of the uncivilized flaming in this group.  I think that
commentary here was more interesting when it included obnoxious
remarks by the likes of Wicinski and Hofmann.

HAs it really been almost 4 years?
John