Have you ever hit your thumb with a hammer? I don't mean just taking a little girlie swipe at it, I mean NAILING the sucker.
That's real, man. Even little brains can wrap themselves around the reality of "This *really* hurts." Ok, back to deep discussions of phenomenology, ontology, and epistemology. Really. I'm heading out the door to another dimensional reality; one that involves beer, saxophones, and blues. --Doug On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Russ Abbott <russ.abb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Both RussS and GlennR responded to my question about the disparagement of > "real" mainly by talking about phenomenology, ontology, and epistemology. I > wasn't asking about any of those. I was asking whether you really don't > believe there is such a thing as reality -- whether or not we can preceive > it, conceptualize it, or know about it. I can't even imagine what it would > mean to answer a question like "Is there reality?" in the negative. > > -- RussA > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:14 PM, russell standish > <r.stand...@unsw.edu.au>wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 03:29:20PM -0700, Russ Abbott wrote: >> > I guess you too Glenn. >> > >> > It seems to have become fashionable to act disparagingly toward the >> notion >> > of "real." What do you intend to substitute for it? >> > >> > -- Russ >> > >> > >> >> I too, am in the camp that cannot fathom what "real" could possibly >> mean. For me, science is about studying phenomenological consistency - >> we cannot live in any old world, we cannot, for instance, live in a >> world incompatible with our presence in that world, ie the Anthropic >> Principle. >> >> But just because phenomenology is consistent, does not make it >> real. There is no ontological commitment here. In fact, I tend to >> believe that other phenomenologically consistent worlds that are >> inconsistent with our own also exist "out there" in the same sense as >> our own. The total sum of which adds up to nothing (in a resultant >> sense), which requires little, if any ontological commitment. >> >> I have no problem studying our own patch of phenomenology. It means >> something to us, even if the in global scheme of things (if there >> could be such a viewpoint), it is fundamentally absurd. >> >> And if Glen can make a plug, then I can too. The above is discussed in >> considerable more detail in my book "Theory of Nothing", which of >> course is already known to the list. >> >> >> Cheers >> -- >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) >> Mathematics >> UNSW SYDNEY 2052 hpco...@hpcoders.com.au >> Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
