I came across the following blog posting by David Justice, which made me smile: http://worldofdrjustice.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/consilience.html
I wonder who the fundamental tenant really is? Oh, dear... That typo got through to the second edition too. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Russell Standish, a mathematician, cites the work of his chatmate, one Bruno: His conclusion is, instead of psychology being reducible to, or indeed emerging from the laws of physics, the fundamental laws of physics are in fact a conseuence of the properties of machine psychology. This is indeed a revolutionary reversal of the traditional ontology of these subjects. Russell Standish, Theory of Nothing (2006; 2nd edn. 2011), p. 129 Such a view is certainly consilient, though it stands Wilsonian consilience on its head, along with common sense. And Standish embraces it thus (solecistically): “I agree with this fundamental tenant.” By that he means tenet; but “machine psychology” is no typo -- sic, as it stands -- albeit it would make about as much sense to derive the laws of physics rather from marine psychology : We are all but the dreams of porpoises … [Update 16 III 2012] A striven-for consilience of art criticism and neuroscience: http://chronicle.com/article/Eric-Kandels-Visions/131095/ -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" 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/everything-list?hl=en.
