So Trust is a Crap Concept which does not exist. I "Trust" my politiicians
NOT to whip up racial tension and what does David Cameron do in Germany
yesterday, exactly the opposite!!! Are we in Britain all supposed to dress
in a "uniform" to please Mr. Cameron? Or are we just not selling enough
guns at the moment?? He could not have done a better job for the BNP!!! it
reminds me of the tune I play "Mao Tse Tung said change must come through
the Barrel of a gun" blah. Just another excuse to promote negative systems.
Truth is just perception, twisted just deception
Honesty's a fallacy in a land of "Oversee"
Fear is what is thrown upon them, by all those who want to "Own" them
All that's given is hypocracy, give our lives Democracy
Deviously they rule the places, callous minds, some calloused faces
Even though we know they're "Guilty", this is a land with unjust cruelty
to kick them down and tread upon them and fill the mind with a mental
problem
then force their laws strategically, GIVE ALL LIFE SOME DIGNITY
All power corrupts, whether it be gas, electricity, politicians, to
eradicate this, politics has to become "Faceless".
Finally, whilst I am here, money might have been a good idea when Alexander
the Great was around but it sure isn't working well now. Why is it, when
technology and other products evolve, we still do we always cling to an
obsolete method of credit or merit??
-----Original Message-----
From: aruzinsky
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 4:51 PM
To: Epistemology
Subject: [epistemology 11653] Re: Can ideas be original?
2. You believe that your stupid mistake is not a stupid mistake.
On Sep 20, 8:37 am, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
Is this an answer to "Name One?"
Bizarre!!!
On Sep 20, 3:24 pm, aruzinsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1. You replied to a post I made to achoka by asking, "Do you really
> think I need to consult Wiki for these topics??" instead of "Do you
> really think achoka needs to consult Wiki for these topics??"
> On Sep 19, 10:20 am, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Name ONE!
> > On Sep 18, 7:14 pm, aruzinsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I am not the one with a recent history of many stupid mistakes.
> > > On Sep 17, 1:08 pm, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > An interesting way to crawl back under your rock!
> > > > On Sep 17, 5:26 pm, aruzinsky <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Since you confused yourself with achoka, I do now.
> > > > > On Sep 16, 12:29 pm, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Do you really think I need to consult Wiki for these topics??
> > > > > > On Sep 9, 4:33 pm, aruzinsky <[email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Some categories of (semi, quasi, barely) scientific study
> > > > > > > of humans
> > > > > > > have been termed, "anthropology," "sociology" and
> > > > > > > "psychiatry." See
> > > > > >
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki...
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > How are these "inadequacies of human cultural expression"
> > > > > > > and how are
> > > > > > > they "bogging" me down? I do not confuse these with human
> > > > > > > history,
> > > > > > > either.
> > > > > > > On Sep 8, 10:31 am, awori achoka <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Humans--let us proceed with care---without allowing the
> > > > > > > > *tyranny of the
> > > > > > > > inadequacies of human cultural expression* (language)--to
> > > > > > > > bog us down. Call
> > > > > > > > them laws, or orders---nature does have a pre-existent
> > > > > > > > organizing principles
> > > > > > > > within which humans are (also) just but an element.
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:02 PM, aruzinsky
> > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 1. I did not say or imply "eternal and absolute." I
> > > > > > > > > said SUBSTANTIAL
> > > > > > > > > spatial and temporal generality.
> > > > > > > > > 2. What you are calling "laws" were, in fact, models.
> > > > > > > > > Whereas many
> > > > > > > > > past scientists falsely believed that their models were
> > > > > > > > > laws, I
> > > > > > > > > suspect that modern scientists tend to no longer believe
> > > > > > > > > in laws (I
> > > > > > > > > don't know because I haven't taken a poll.). See
> > > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_modelling. The
> > > > > > > > >practical
> > > > > > > > > difference between a law and a model is that a user, who
> > > > > > > > > knows the
> > > > > > > > > model is not a law, isn't disgraced and does not whine
> > > > > > > > > when a better
> > > > > > > > > model is discovered. Probably, engineers took the lead
> > > > > > > > > in scientific
> > > > > > > > > modeling but that history isn't as important as the
> > > > > > > > > current popular
> > > > > > > > > state of thinking.
> > > > > > > > > 3. It is not the belief in the model that must have
> > > > > > > > > substantial
> > > > > > > > > spatial and temporal generality, as you seem to wrongly
> > > > > > > > > assert, but
> > > > > > > > > the applicability and accuracy of the model that must
> > > > > > > > > have substantial
> > > > > > > > > spatial and temporal generality. Note at the bottom of
> > > > > > > > > the above
> > > > > > > > > reference,
> > > > > > > > > "Ability to explain past observations"
> > > > > > > > > "Ability to predict future observations"
> > > > > > > > > That is what is meant by "temporal generality."
> > > > > > > > > 4. Apparently, your perception of reality is distorted
> > > > > > > > > by a type in
> > > > > > > > > insanity called "anthropocentrism," see
> > > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocentrism,
> > > > > > > > > because you confuse
> > > > > > > > > 4.1. human history and science
> > > > > > > > > 4.2. ... generality of human belief in laws/models with
> > > > > > > > > ... generality
> > > > > > > > > of laws/models.
> > > > > > > > > On Sep 8, 5:47 am, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I think I have made my position clear on this
> > > > > > > > > > elsewhere. Laws are not
> > > > > > > > > > eternal and absolute. Many are discarded and
> > > > > > > > > > reinvented in the light
> > > > > > > > > > of new information, some persist despite that. But
> > > > > > > > > > some laws that are
> > > > > > > > > > now fully abandoned served mankind for 100s of years
> > > > > > > > > > and were "know"
> > > > > > > > > > to be true despite their eventual dismissal.
> > > > > > > > > > If scientists are unaware of the historical
> > > > > > > > > > contingency of the laws
> > > > > > > > > > that assert, as so many are, then they will remain
> > > > > > > > > > intransigent and
> > > > > > > > > > resisting of modifications to their own beliefs, and
> > > > > > > > > > treat innovation
> > > > > > > > > > with inertia.
> > > > > > > > > > On Sep 7, 1:19 am, aruzinsky
> > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Science is the study of laws or models with
> > > > > > > > > > > substantial spatial and
> > > > > > > > > > > temporal generality. Who did what at a specific
> > > > > > > > > > > time and place is not
> > > > > > > > > > > a science because it lacks spatial and temporal
> > > > > > > > > > > generality.
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 6, 12:06 pm, chazwin <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 6, 5:20 pm, aruzinsky
> > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 3:04 pm, chazwin <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every country does that. American too. They
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > claim to have the
> > > > > > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > example of an electric light, but this is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > false. The first
> > > > > > > > > working
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > electric light was invented by Farraday in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1859. The South
> > > > > > > > > Foreland
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lighthouse was the world's first ever man made
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > electric light,
> > > > > > > > > and got
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > its power from another of Farraday's
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventions the electrical
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generator.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 4:52 pm, aruzinsky
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 22, 10:17 am, Awori
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as an original idea?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can ideas
> > > > > > > > > originate from
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is imitation the opposite of your concept of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "original idea"?
> > > > > > > > > Many
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ideas are repeated without imitation, e.g.,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reinventing the
> > > > > > > > > wheel. It
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > used to be a joke that the Soviet
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Union/Russia claimed that
> > > > > > > > > many
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things were invented by its citizens before
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > famous American
> > > > > > > > > inventors
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such as Thomas Edison. Many of those claims
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > were true. Since
> > > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is no way of knowing whether something was
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > previously invented
> > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intelligent life on another planet, there is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no point on
> > > > > > > > > dwelling on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the concept of first idea. Instead, you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should concentrate on
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > concept of imitation. For example, look at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all the people
> > > > > > > > > jumping on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the DNA bandwagon in this thread.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "As each organism is unique, then all DNA
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > arrangements are
> > > > > > > > > original."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Identical twins are not unique in any way
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > related to DNA.
> > > > > > > > > Any
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > uniqueness of identical twins should be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > attributed to
> > > > > > > > > environment.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Same for organisms that reproduce
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asexually.- Hide quoted text
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Small talk:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > As a child in the early 1950s, while watching a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz show on TV, a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > contestant selected "Science" as a topic. The
> > > > > > > > > > > > > question was, "Who
> > > > > > > > > > > > > invented the steam engine?" I shouted at the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > TV, "That's not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > science. That's history!" Apparently, some
> > > > > > > > > > > > > immoral history buffs
> > > > > > > > > > > > > had wormed their way into positions of authority
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on that TV show
> > > > > > > > > just
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to shove history lessons, disguised as science,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > up my ass.
> > > > > > > > > Probably,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the same kind of assholes who like to say,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "Those who do not learn
> > > > > > > > > > > > > from history are doomed to repeat it."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Regardless of my learning
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > > > history, I am not doomed to reinvent the steam
> > > > > > > > > > > > > engine.
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not so sure I'd so easily disregard history of
> > > > > > > > > > > > science as part of
> > > > > > > > > > > > science. As a piece of trivia Newcomen's (or was
> > > > > > > > > > > > it Watt's)
> > > > > > > > > > > > achievement on a developmental level is highly
> > > > > > > > > > > > significant to an
> > > > > > > > > > > > understanding of science which is far more
> > > > > > > > > > > > contingent on historical
> > > > > > > > > > > > interests than scientist would like to admit.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Steam Power massively
> > > > > > > > > > > > enhanced our understanding of the nature of heat,
> > > > > > > > > > > > energy and its
> > > > > > > > > > > > relation to fuel and power.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
> > > > > > > > > the Google Groups
> > > > > > > > > "Epistemology" group.
...
read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--
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.
--
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.
