Stefan:
>One of the well known professors of linguistics reluctantly admitted >(with
>many reservations) that the role of chance in all those >coincidences is
>"rather pervasive", though "we lack a yardstick for >evaluating the effect
>of coincidences of lexical similarities."
>[...]
>Well, my advice would be - let's study the chaos theory because, as
>in everything else in this universe of ours - chaos and order must
>be equally balanced and taken into account if we are to get anywhere
>in our search for truth.
Ultimately, chaos and order could be one and the same since the distinction
between existence and non-existence is unfounded, an assumption that serves
as basis for Logic, violating Occam's Razor :) Perhaps in my next life, I'll
become a Buddhist.
However, in this life, if we might strive to keep ourselves within the
bounds of logic as one should if one wishes to be considered a scientist
(for what is the definition of an insane individual but one that has strayed
from logic), then we must evaluate and order theories based on their logical
probability, not on pure belief. The probability that IE or its ancestor
stages lied in Sundaland within the past 10,000 years, given the competent
data from varying disciplines, is uncompetitive with the generally accepted
theories that take reality, in the form of archaeology and linguistic
findings, fully into account. Theories based on the metaphysical are
unscientific, not based on physical reality.
And so, I suppose it all depends on what you want in the end. If you wish to
live in a logical world, personal belief is irrelevant. If you wish to live
in a chaotic world, personal belief will be important to you. I wish to live
in a logical world.
- gLeN
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com