Caro Bruno, condivido il Tuo pensiero. Coincide o assomiglia al mio. approccio onto-epistemo-logico empirico o concreto. Le metafisiche idee della mente sono necessarie per conoscere la realtà. Tutte le scienze ne fanno uso, compresa la matematica. Quando la matematica non ce la fa a farci comprendere (la teoria del) tutto ci rivolgiamo all'arte o poesia della musica (John D. Barrow, "Teorie del tutto. La ricerca della spiegazione ultima", Adelphi, Milano, 1992). Ilya Prigogine sostiene che la musica dovrebbe diventare il paradigma della scienza proprio per la funzione svolta dal tempo che è una variabile creativa. Ho dedicato numerosi libri allo studio del rapporto tra fede religiosa, teologia-filosofia e scienza, al fine di ri-comprendere, re-incantare, re-interpretare e ri-significare l'economia. Da questo processo che ha contrassegnato più di mezzo secolo. di ricerca è nata una NUOVA ECONOMIA. Per comprenderla- a partire da "Il giudizio di valore", Università di Catania, 1972 - cfr.il mio pentateuco costituito dai miei ultimi cinque libri:: * "Nuova economia", Aracne editrice, Roma, 2013; * "Incontro d'amore tra il cuore della fede e l'intelligenza della scienza", Aracne editrice, Roma, 2014; * "Una vita. Il figlio del garzone", Aracne editrice, Roma, 2015; * "La scienza non può non essere umana, civile, sociale, ECONOMI(C)A, enigmatica, nobile, profetica", Aracne editrice, Roma, 2016; * "Una nuova avventura tra l'idolatria del denaro e lo spirito dell'amore con compassione o viscerale emo-ra-zionalità", Aracne editrice, Roma, 2017. Peccato che siano scritti in italiano! Un saluto augurale. Francecso
2017-11-10 18:12 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>: > Dear Arturo, dear FISers, > > > On 08 Nov 2017, at 22:11, tozziart...@libero.it wrote: > > Dear FISers, > > science talks about observables, i.e., quantifiable parameters. > > > I can't agree more. Science measure numbers, and infer relations among > them. But we know also that untestable ideas can be powerful tool. Most > progress in mathematics and physics have relied on the axiom of infinity in > mathematics, or belief in a physical reality. So let us be precise that > indirect testing should be allowed. > > > > > > Therefore, describing the word "information" in terms of philosophers' > statements, hypothetical useless triads coming from nowhere, the ridicolous > Rupert Sheldrake's account, mind communication, > > > I can understand up to here. > > > > qualitative subjective issues of the mind, inconclusive phenomelogical > accounts with an hint of useless husserlian claims, and such kind of > amenities is simply: NOT scientific. > > > Hmm... I disagree. This is NOT scientific. A reasoning which takes into > account the "qualitative issues of the mind" (which is rather normal when > we discuss information in some larger sense than Shannon one) MIGHT (and > SHOULD) have observable quantitative consequences. You talk like if that > was impossible, without providing an argument, which would be refuted by my > contribution. Even point in "theology" becomes testable, when the > definitions and reasonings are made clear and precise enough (which is the > case when we use the suitable hypothesis to do just that. > > Here it seems to me that you throw out the baby with the water bath. You > seem to ask for direct testability, which is close to metaphysical > positivism (which has been logically refuted). > > > > > It could be interesting, if you are a magician or a follower of Ermetes > Trismegistus, but, if you are (or you think to be) a scientist, this is > simply not science. > > > > It is science if it leads to a simpler theory fitting with the > quantitative facts, or a more complex theory, being alone to fit some known > quantitative facts. > But of course, such theories should not deny known and admitted > psychological realities; if not "information" itself stops to make any > larger sense than the one in the theory of Shannon or of > Feynman-Deutsch-Landauer-Zurek. In that case we might suspect the > widespread confusion between physics, and metaphysical physicalism, which > is not scientific. > > When working on "information", a theory fitting with the quantitative > facts, but not with "common" qualitative facts should be considered > unscientific, because it denies undoubtable and important aspect of > information and reality. It hides data. > > > > Such claims are dangerous, because they are the kind of claims that lead > to NO-VAX movements, religious stuff in theoretical physics, Heideggerian > metapyhsics. Very interesting, but NOT science. > > > > You might go a bit far on this. If you deny the use of the scientific > method on the religious terrain, you condemn that domain to remain in the > realm of the superstition. Also, some people talk like if the existence of > primary matter was a scientific fact: this too is unscientific. If we want > related information and reality, I doubt we can progress if we don't try to > make clear the metaphysical assumptions. When clear enough, as my work > illustrated, they become quantitatively testable. It is just an historical > accident that theology has been separated from science, and we know that > the goal was to prevent research and use only violence and argument > per-authority. There is no reason to pursue that way. We must just ask > politely people to indicate how their ideas can be tested, directly or > indirectly, in case it is not clear. > > Best Regards, > > Bruno > > > > > > That's all: 'nuff said. > > *Arturo Tozzi* > > AA Professor Physics, University North Texas > > Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy > > Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba > > http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/ > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > >
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
