Wasn't there supposed to be a third principle in there somewhere? "A theory that explains everything explains nothing."
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Harry Pollard <[email protected] > wrote: > Assume there is no order in the universe. How can there be science the job > of which is to find order. > > > > If two identical experiments produce different results again and again > there is no point to further scientific experiments. > > > > Nothing can be certain any more if there isn’t an order. > > > > Why irregularities? They are presumably the normal situation. We can > certainly speculate of various situations in the universe, but we do so as > if we can find the order that exists. > > > > “Man’s desires are unlimited.” > > > > There is no limit to our desires. I may desire a Cadillac, but haven’t a > chance of fulfilling the desire – but it doesn’t go away. If things change, > perhaps it becomes more possible for me to get the car and I might well move > it up my mental list. As earlier desires are satisfied, others spring up. > There are no environmental limitations, just the personal limitations to > satisfying the desires one has. > > > > I fear you haven’t “demonstrated above”. Artists may well find it difficult > to satisfy their unlimited desires – as do we – but they try to accomplish > their desires with the least exertion. They wouldn’t tie one hand behind > their back to increase the exertion needed to finish their work. When a > desire is perfection, no amount of exertion might be enough. > > > > If painting your house is fun for you, go ahead, but I doubt you will make > it difficult for yourself to enjoy the fun. You will accomplish your desire > with the least amount of exertion – if you know the least amount. > > > > I essentially doubled the size of my house myself. But crawling around in > the space under the house to connect plumbing pipes is not fun. Adding gas > heating to the new parts is not fun when you know that errors might kill > your family later. Electric wiring is easier but takes much care. > > > > I think painting is drudgery but it has to be done. I’m happy it is fun for > you. > > > > There are many other things I would prefer to do than paint my house. > > > > But, in all the things I do, I try to minimize the exertion I use to > accomplish things and I can tell you now that you do the same. > > > > Harry > > > > ****************************** > > Henry George School of Los Angeles > > Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 > > (818) 352-4141 > > ****************************** > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *D and N > *Sent:* Sunday, January 09, 2011 9:09 PM > *To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION > *Subject:* [Futurework] A robot stole my job > > > > Hi Harry, and all others enjoying this discussion around Harry's statements > > *The two major assumptions of all sciences may be;* > > * “There is an order in the universe.”* > > * “The mind of Man can discover that order.”* > > * The two assumptions of Political Economy are:* > > * “Man’s desires are unlimited.”* > > * “Man seeks to satisfy his desires with the least exertion.”* > > I'm happy to see that Harry qualified the first two assumptions with* 'may > be'*. I believe as of the last century it was determined that a touch of > disorder within our own universe made possible the universe we have come to > know. Irregularities in the fledgling familiar universe caused slightly > higher densities in some areas, thus locally slowing expansion and > increasing gravitational attraction. Gravity draws matter together, > collapses to form galaxies, then planets such as our own. In 2010 they > released data based on seven years study of microwave temperature > fluctuations dating back 13.7 billion years. A thousandth of a degree C. was > apparently enough to form life-teeming galaxies like the Milky Way. Perhaps > discovering this significant yet tiny fluctuation is on the path toward > discovering how our own universe came about, but this only pertains to four > measurable dimensions of discovery for now. If there are indeed seven other > dimensions, as speculated, all of which are so small and curled up that it > gives one's hair a perm just thinking about it, and science manages to > unfurl and integrate these into an "M" theory to explain everything, there > shall indeed be more information for our minds, though not necessarily > discernible order. In this universe. The trick is that in most other > universes, where fluctuations shortly after the big bang would have caused > completely different systems or life design, the mind of 'man' would likely > be incapable of any satisfying single set of natural laws to apply to it > all. > > The second two assumptions most of the list have responded to with fine > points and great personal style. The first statement, I think, is only > generally true because we are limited by certain aspects of environment. > Conceiving of a completely "remote" desire would be impossible without some > seminal framework for said desire. I would suggest that unlimited desire be > reserved for what you may consider to be the improbable, like perhaps the > immortal "Q" on Star Trek, or humans in the heavenly "afterlife" acquainted > with omniscience. > > The second assumption presuming to describe the conditions around > satisfying desire within the realm of production is easily undone if one > just stops to consider the artistic process, Harry's ability to create > distracting replies being no exception amongst such endeavours. Take an > artist's painting of a portrait, a landscape or abstract work. It is not > only a mental exercise, it is also quite physical. The very best artists > will make every effort to create something extraordinary--not just for > others to buy, but for themselves to experience in accordance with their > personal code of excellence before they can consider the work finished. A > great recording artist or opera singer will strive for the finest possible > performance created not by adequate practice or rendition, but by pushing > themselves to the greatest possible interpretation of which they are capable > within their own unique gift of presentation and physical ability. A great > writer cannot produce a lazy book, Antonio Gaudi did not come by effortless > masterpieces in architecture. Let's presume none of these examples mentioned > thus far would be better suited to make money in any other fashion (highest > and best use of talents), though of course they could have picked tomatoes > for Monsanto to help shareholders and CEOs and perhaps Harry's position. > > Exertion experienced within the process towards an end is often a big part > of the joy in doing. Painting one's house, for example, although not as > efficient as hiring pros, is not only productive--it's fun for many of us, > and instills a sense of pride and connection to one's home. Exertion like > this often teaches us skills, too, apart from possible future delegation of > said task. Home decorating contributes to the very important sector of the > economy known as real estate. Within that sector, we have not only > commodities that directly affect countless other industries, but also house > the very beings who dream the dreams. Exertion will never be only just > adequate where it comes to teaching, nursing, gardening, psychotherapy, or > even fly fishing, and getting these jobs done quickly is usually never the > goal in mind. Though many tasks or jobs are conducted to achieve results, > most things or goals for which we strive are not measured against time or > effort, though they are often judged for finesse. They are tasks or > occupations in which we lose ourselves in time in order that we eventually > get to stand back and say, "good job". > > I believe Harry has a point where one has to admit that just getting the > job done is all that counts, only efficiency pays, or they need a meal and > are too tired to prepare a good one themselves. But as demonstrated above, > there are many aspects to production or productivity in which this can never > be the case. > > Cheers, > Natalia Kuzmyn > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > -- Sandwichman
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
