Brent wrote: > If you know the domain of your model there won't be any impact from beyond. Of course the domain is uncertain at the edges - but just because there is Grey doesn't mean there is no black and white.< Our views (I did not press: definition) of a "model' differs. Since I consider the totality as interrelated and interactive and the 'model' a topical cut as the object of our observation (c.f.: sciences) those boundaries we surround our (my) models are 'cutting off' the rest of the world. With all the influence it may have on events BENEATH those (selected) boundaries. I am not talking about a grey area. * > Should we then resort mystical thinking or armchair philosophizing or theological revelation?< I do not call your wording an argumentation (style?) ad hominem, if you know no better variant, you can refer to any one that comes to your mind. Finally: > Can you do some other kind of thinking?< The answer is: YES, for one there are things to which I respond "I dunno" but try to think in new ways which does not mean that I also completed it. To know about something that is not perfect does not imply the obligation to 'perfect it' at the same time. It takes lots of work. Without necessarily resorting to mystics or (religious) theology.
John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brent Meeker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <email@example.com> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:00 PM Subject: Re: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology' > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Stathis: > > would you condone to include in your (appreciated) post below the words at > > the * I plant into your text? > > The words: "in the (scientific?) belief system we have TODAY about our > > interpretation of whatever epistemically we so far learned about the > > 'world'." > > That would underline your subsequent sentence - if you kindly stop > > denigrating the term 'metaphysics' - a pejoration of the same 'carried away' > > physicists. > > > > The word 'prediction' also sends the chill alongside my spine: how can a > > model based on a model predict events subject to impact from 'beyond model' > > changes? > > If you know the domain of your model there won't be any impact from beyond. Of > course the domain is uncertain at the edges - but just because there is grey doesn't > mean there is no black and white. > > > The many results of science-technology should not lead us into a generalized > > acceptance of the model-based thinking. > > Should we then resort mystical thinking or armchair philosophizing or theological > revelation? > > >This list is a good example. > > Can you do some other kind of thinking? > > Brent Meeker > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.6/427 - Release Date: 08/24/06 > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---