if we're willing to first assume a god, then that gives us a ladder to climb up out of the hole in the ground.

usually, i've depended upon monetary theorists, and macro economists to supply the ladder.

but, probably god could do the job just as well. maybe better. i don't know. [/quote]

What good reason is there to assume any supernatural being?

Why assume god(s) and not pixies?[/quote]

there's more potential payoffs in assuming gods, vs. something less?

i mean, if we're going to assume "something" then let's go for the gold?

well, silver is good. it'll be the lesser of the two, and it'll buy meals at the store.

now, if pixies want to challenge the gods, and offer more, then let's hear their argument?

if the marketeers who represent and support the pixies, and can offer a good payoff, then why not?

right now, we're looking for a leader, down here on the urth, where we eat, work, and pay taxes. what next?
[/quote]

How about we don't assume anything, and base our beliefs on good evidence?[/quote]

oh my god! the idea is quite worthy.

but, it'd be an advance in the system?

i depend upon the macro economists.

are they all wrong? if so, then what?

whose got a better theory?

it's all theory, surely you know?