<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for LYCEUMBLOG</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog</link>
	<description>A Weblog for Informal Discussion of Articles from the LYCEUM</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:49 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Christopher Tollefsen: The New Natural Law Theory by Dwight Breon</title>
		<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=84&#038;cpage=1#comment-49550</link>
		<dc:creator>Dwight Breon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=84#comment-49550</guid>
		<description>The website is up and rocking.
Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The website is up and rocking.<br />
Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mathais Sarrazin: The “Rightness” Error by sharon</title>
		<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=76&#038;cpage=1#comment-41489</link>
		<dc:creator>sharon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:48:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=76#comment-41489</guid>
		<description>glad to see your doing good :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>glad to see your doing good <img src='http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Martha King: Kant’s Theory of Geometry in Light of the Development of Non-Euclidean Geometries by Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=13&#038;cpage=1#comment-26571</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:12:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=13#comment-26571</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d simply like to add that this has seemed to have been the trend in science in recent years.  They try to shroud themselves in enigmatic obscurity to make science seem more inaccessible.  In my opinion, it&#039;s more of a cry for help, because they&#039;re finding themselves against a brick wall, before which their most coveted beliefs are being exposed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d simply like to add that this has seemed to have been the trend in science in recent years.  They try to shroud themselves in enigmatic obscurity to make science seem more inaccessible.  In my opinion, it&#8217;s more of a cry for help, because they&#8217;re finding themselves against a brick wall, before which their most coveted beliefs are being exposed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Martha King: Kant’s Theory of Geometry in Light of the Development of Non-Euclidean Geometries by Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=13&#038;cpage=1#comment-26570</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=13#comment-26570</guid>
		<description>The link to the article wasn&#039;t any good, so I&#039;ll continue without making any reference to it.  Non-Euclidean geometry always redefines common-sense propositions, therefore there is no conflict.  &quot;Curved-space&quot; geometry from its inception negates the possibility of what could be called a straight line.  A priori judgements remain intact, and any judgement from NE geometry, as useful as they may be, must be interpreted appropriately as narrowly constrained by dictated rules.  For example:  The shortest distance between two lines is a curve, must be understood to mean:  You take the curved road, not because it&#039;s the shortest distance as you might think, but because straight lines are forbidden in this particular geometry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The link to the article wasn&#8217;t any good, so I&#8217;ll continue without making any reference to it.  Non-Euclidean geometry always redefines common-sense propositions, therefore there is no conflict.  &#8220;Curved-space&#8221; geometry from its inception negates the possibility of what could be called a straight line.  A priori judgements remain intact, and any judgement from NE geometry, as useful as they may be, must be interpreted appropriately as narrowly constrained by dictated rules.  For example:  The shortest distance between two lines is a curve, must be understood to mean:  You take the curved road, not because it&#8217;s the shortest distance as you might think, but because straight lines are forbidden in this particular geometry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Issue (8-2) Forthcoming in June by tovorinok</title>
		<link>http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=8&#038;cpage=1#comment-205</link>
		<dc:creator>tovorinok</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2007 11:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lyceumphilosophy.com/blog/?p=8#comment-205</guid>
		<description>Hello 
 
Great book. I just want to say what a fantastic thing you are doing! Good luck! 
 
 
Bye</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello </p>
<p>Great book. I just want to say what a fantastic thing you are doing! Good luck! </p>
<p>Bye</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

