I concur about diversity being integral to reality, but I'd add that
GST has already met your belief system with "The Law of Requisite
Variety." I so happens that any system will ultimately become defunct
if a requisite degree of diversity is not maintained... this is
evidenced in everything from a gene pool to the eco-system.  You may
be interested in a group at LinkedIn entitled General Systems Theory,
which is run by a prof hailing from Harvard. Check it out... I have
some posts there myself.

On Sep 6, 10:42 pm, "Sam Carana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Diversity constitutes reality, we know that for a fact.
>
> Those who have shared my epistemological contemplations will be
> familiar with the fact that I believe that DIVERSITY is fundamental to
> everything that exists. In short, diversity constitutes reality, as it
> always has and as will always be the case.
>
> Those who are smart and new here may ask how I can know this for a
> fact. Indeed, how can diversity be rhymed with the singularity
> inherent in facts? Indeed, how can I write the word "fact" in above
> sentence, before even mentioning diversity?
>
> In fact, I have always accepted facts, I actually like to start with
> the facts and focus on reality. What I do NOT accept is the idea that
> facts were inherently singular and therefore excluded diversity. Those
> who know me, know that I do start with the facts and stick with the
> facts, while all the time believing that diversity is fundamental to
> reality. But let's have a look at an example, perhaps that will
> clarify things.
>
> Imagine a motorcycle driver, young and reckless, stupid and brave,
> driving fast through the night on a lonely country road. The driver
> chases a car that manages to just stay ahead, by similarly driving at
> speeds far too fast for such a windy road. At the next curve, as the
> motorcycle starts overtaking the car, two lights appear from the
> opposite direction. The motorcycle driver has only a split-second to
> decide to either slow down or keep overtaking. Naturally, the
> motorcycle driver, in such a crucial decision, will resort to the
> facts.
>
> What do the facts say? Fact is that motorcycle drivers are prone to
> fatal accidents, a good many of which are head-on collisions. Fact is
> that it's dangerous, often even prohibited to overtake a car in a
> curve. Fact is that motorcycles constitutes a small minority of
> vehicles, so the chance is small that the two lights approaching from
> the opposite direction are two motorcycles. The chance is even smaller
> that two motorcycle would - stupidly - drive next to each other on a
> windy country road in the night, instead of one behind the other.
>
> So, what goes through the head of the motorcyclist while overtaking
> the car? There may be a tiny chance that the approaching two lights
> are of two motorcyclists. So, there is a tiny chance to continue to
> overtake the car, and stay in between these two motorcyclists without
> causing accidents. But the probability is low, in fact, there's a
> bigger chance that the two lights from a car, or even a bus or a
> truck.
>
> Was there an emergency that justified taking such risks? What exactly
> are the odds and the risks? Is there time to contemplate such
> questions when one's survival depends on a split-second decision? Of
> course, we all know the answer and any mature motorcycle driver knows
> it too. We know what to do, not so much because we were in possession
> of all the facts, We know what to do, not so much because we did
> explore all alternatives, exhaustively testing them and proved them to
> be wrong. Instead, we know what to do, because experience and maturity
> tells us what to do.
>
> Similarly, we've got to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We
> know that for a fact. Global warming is a fact and there IS no
> alternative but to reduce emissions. This conclusion is not in
> conflict with the diversity that is inherent to reality. We simply do
> not have the luxury to first explore the alternative and await proof
> that temperatures will indeed rise with catastrophic results. We do
> not have that option. We know that global warming is taking place and
> we know that we must act now. That conclusion is fully in agreement
> with the principle that diversity is fundamental to reality. We know
> that we must act now to reduce emissions, we know that for a fact -
> wisdom, experience and maturity tells us so.
>
> Cheers!
> I am Sam Carana, and I like ti start with facts and focus on reality.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to