Thus spake Russ Abbott circa 09-09-18 09:53 AM:
> Glen, You and Nick (and I) actually agree that thought is not necessary for
> us to eat, walk, etc. We do it whether or not we think that we do it. It
> seems to me that you are supposing that Nick (and I) are saying something
> different. We're not.  What I'm saying (and what I imagine Nick is saying)
> is that once one starts to think about it, it makes no sense to deny
> reality, not that our thought is necessary for reality.

And I find that ridiculous.  What has changed "once one starts to think
about it"???  Nothing.  You still act the way you act, regardless.

What galls me is this "it makes no sense" part.  Makes no sense to whom?
 You?  Are you claiming that things must make sense to _you_ in order
for them to happen?

So, although you may _think_ you're saying the same thing I am, you most
definitely are not.  You're saying that (by some magic) your belief
matters to your actions.  And I'm saying it doesn't.  Actions don't have
to "make sense".

Now, there are some amongst us (you seem to be one of them) who _desire_
things to make sense to them or else they have trouble believing them.
Fine.  Do whatever you need to do in your own brain to make sense of
your experiences.  If you need to believe in a convenient fiction (e.g.
external reality, God, whatever), do it.  But don't claim that we're all
wrong or confused if we don't believe the same way you believe.

> Furthermore, I would add (and I don't know what Nick thinks about this),
> that we are thiking beings and that we almost can't help ourselves from
> thinking.

I agree.  But it doesn't mean that what we think is True.

> Consequently (in my view), we can't honestly say that we have no
> opinion about reality. We can hardly help ourselves. It's part of human
> nature to look around, observe, and conclude.

Wrong.  We *can* have "no opinion" because what you mean by "no opinion"
is "no _single_ opinion".  I actually have _lots_ of opinions about
reality, DEPENDING on the context, as I explained before ad nauseum.
And I actually believe that every thinking creature has
context-dependent opinions, even you.

Again, however, there are some of us with a mental illness who _insist_
on reducing every opinion they have down to a _single_ opinion that
applies across the board to all contexts they or anyone else shall ever
experience.  This is akin to the psychological symptom of "delusions of
grandeur".  The rest of us just accept that we have multiple, sometimes
contradictory opinions, and go about our day without chewing our nails
off about it.

As I quoted before:  "I have noticed even people who claim everything is
predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they
cross the road." -- Steven Hawking.

I'll throw in another of my favorites:  "Do I contradict myself?  Very
well, then, I contradict myself; (I am large -- I contain multitudes.)"
-- Walt Whitman

> That's one way in which we are different from pond scum.

Oh?  You think the pond scum doesn't also have "opinions"?!?  Can you
define "opinion" crisply enough to prove that?  I suspect not without
making a billion questionable assumptions and launching another endless
philosophical/metaphysical debate about "intention".

> So since (again in my view) one can't help but
> have an opinion about reality (at least once someone poses the question), it
> makes no sense to me to then deny it -- or even to deny having an opinion.
> We just aren't built that way.

I agree that we are built to hold opinions (and I think in some sense
pond scum also hold opinions).  But I disagree that we are built to
reconcile and over-generalize all our concepts so that each concept is
unique and consistent with all other concepts in our heads.  In fact, I
believe we are built to maintain _multiple_ (often contradictory) models
of the various contexts we experience.

> Admittedly that's a somewhat different
> question, and it's possible that we can not have an opinion about issues
> like that. But I doubt it. It's like looking at the sky (with no clouds) and
> denying that one has an opinion about its color. It's hard for me to believe
> that one can do that. But as I said, perhaps it's possible.

I have many opinions about sky color.  I do not have a _single_ opinion
about sky color.

-- 
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://agent-based-modeling.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to