Neil Rickert wrote: > > In <email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill Taylor) writes: > > >But about the prevalence of the Lucas argument:- it seems to me, that it's > >very like the Zeno rubbish. That took close to 2000 years before it was > >seen to be (a) rubbish (b) not a problem. Hopefully the Lucas thing won't > >take anywhere near so long. But in the end, people will look back and > >wonder, "How on *earth* could they have ever thought antything so STUPID!" > > Sorry to be the one to break the bad news. But there are still > people around who do not understand that the Zeno paradox was > rubbish.
Of course the difference between them is that Zeno didn't have the tools to know that it was rubbish, whereas Lucas, Penrose, Guha, et. al. do. But there will always people who just don't get it, whether it's Zeno or Lucas or evolution or UFO's or Christ rising from the dead or whatever.