>> Now, I agree, the unknown doesn't have defined "levels" in the
>> sense that there aren't any natural categories...but our model of
>> it WILL have levels in the sense that our models always have
>> in the past. I can't tell you exactly what it will be like (as you've
>> said...since it's the unknown it's...well, unknown).
>
>And that's the point I'm getting at. You can't postulate how many
>levels there are, 'cos it's unknown, and you can't tell what of the
>unknown is is what level, it's just not possible.
Agreed.
>> But if Richard refers to a "Level 4" or a "level 2.9" he is
>> pointing, in effect, to the moon...the place we, as a species
>> or as individuals, have yet to go and figure out.
>
>So how do you know that it's in the level that Richard refers to? If
>it's unknown, he will have just as little idea as the rest of us as to
>what level the moon is on.
Agreed.
>> Am I making any sense...or is this too far out?
>
>It's making sense. Is my objection making sense?
Yes. I don't have any more to add.
For once.
<VBG>
Reed