I agree entirely Pat - what's frightening is the very bastards who use the word prioritise on us are the worst and turn it into 'you can't have that'! String Theory is by no means the only contender at the moment, but we have anciently held that theories must be adequate to the complexity with which they deal. I don't grok much of physics - I can tell when others quite clearly know what to do as I stumble on wondering - it's a bit like doing long division whilst some savant is doing at by fitting shapes in his head faster than I could use a calculator. It was said long ago that the US would have a black president long before a black nobel prize winner in science, largely because of education deprivation and I suspect that much that shapes our brains early is responsible for what and how we think, including IQ. We remain, as a population, utterly dire at scientific reasoning (PISA OECD studies) - it's not an area where consensus is something that can be achieved on a wide basis through thinking. String is on the borderline with regard to empirical testing and may be a theory that takes us beyond these limits or fall as we replace it with something that gives us practical magic. It seems very difficult to believe that something in thought perhaps as vital in drive as sex is irrelevant. Dawkins et al remind me here of their converse - the medieval miracle believers who saw science as a distraction from the revelation of god.
Thinking of that dreadful oik Pillark and his 'grammer', I wrote something rather long in another thread. I counted over 100 such errors in same before I hit the spellcheck. I do wonder whether we could get over more educational problems by such technical means. My memories of the dread red pen and English teacher ridicule as such I never use handwriting, tossing in the disabled card that my hand hurts too much. I particularly wonder whether logic machines would help, perhaps as spreadsheets do with numbers. On 30 Oct, 13:40, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > In my view, even though the ‘interview’ is very short, it is a great > overview of physics today for the layman. > > On Oct 30, 6:31 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 30 Oct, 13:18, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > At 13:50 a common view of string theory today [“You can say what you > > > want.”]:http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/full-episodes/index.jhtml?... > > > Unfortunately, the site is blocked, here, at work. I take the > > point, though, that it's very open, but that doesn't mean it's wrong, > > rather, it only demonstrates that all the details haven't been worked > > out yet. I'm working on it. ;-) > > > > On Oct 30, 5:20 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 29 Oct, 13:40, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Yes Slip - the logic is 'strange' - a key element in a lot of > > > > > scientific thinking. Ian's wit is sharp here and there is much to > > > > > agree with. Does, for instance, this 'making everyone winners > > > > > sportsday' translate to the current fetish for accrediting everything > > > > > (from NVQs in stair sweeping) and the passing everyone habits in > > > > > schools and universities and the dilution of what school certificates > > > > > and degrees mean? Pat is talking a sophisticated educational language > > > > > that one can find in a recent Cambridge-led review - ideas that very > > > > > much seem to work in Greater Scandinavia and is linked as you point at > > > > > to notions education needs to be linked to a fairer society. The > > > > > pedantry over 'your' and 'you're' may also be a key problem - is this > > > > > attention to detail (sometimes good) or the kind of chronic limiting > > > > > of creativity 'red pen' often brings? Here, one would hope it's just > > > > > an 'in joke' that can damage neither Ian nor I, but it's also > > > > > representative of a miserable educational culture that is marking > > > > > grammatic literacy ahead of ideas. I've had really bright dyselxic > > > > > students reduced to tears and confidence collapse by much worse and > > > > > the arguments about this establishment bias go back to Labov how > > > > > sought to show one could find more intelligence in street-talk on real > > > > > problems than amongst Ivy League training mediocrity. Ian's tale was > > > > > short and cutting (to a chase). I can't remember how many people have > > > > > assumed I must be an idiot, sexist, racist and so on because I played > > > > > so much sport and was so competitive. I'd say the experience helped > > > > > make me the opposite. Key in Wittgenstein's form of deconstruction is > > > > > an ability to see many apparently opposing arguments are not what they > > > > > seem, that they can be based in similarities (the key notion in the > > > > > Ludwig and Snell programmes in the hsitory of science). Chris is > > > > > right too, that the 'chavs' can easily take advantage in our society - > > > > > we could go a lot further and spot this in forms of 'intellectual > > > > > chavism' and varieties of it in the 'holier than thou' claiming moral > > > > > certainty, or even those apparently denying such certainty whilst > > > > > living very comfortably as commentators of the left. > > > > > > Pat suggests a solution of new competitions with worthy ends. Quite > > > > > right - almost nothing left to say and much to do. > > > > > > Before turning a few words in here I was 'supervising' my grandson and > > > > > some of his mates - it's half-term (pure joy!) - two black lads and > > > > > 'half-cast' (where do we get these terms?) and a lot of east-European > > > > > genes, now off in search of Jamil after some Grand Theft Auto. Not a > > > > > trace of racism amongst them and families who make a few extra chips > > > > > and such in hospitality - yet around us the old problems are rearing > > > > > their ugly heads again - they have never gone away. > > > > > > On the IQ stuff there is key scientific evidence - that we differ very > > > > > little genetically - that should be making us see the problem clearly > > > > > as indicating unfairness and a proneness to see certainties (such as > > > > > races lacking intelligence) where there is nothing other than cultural > > > > > elitism and self-deception, a repeated failure to see how different > > > > > and radical a fair society would be. Our kids sort of manage it - > > > > > what are we doing that destroys this? Sport is a good exemplar of how > > > > > much nonsense is talked on superiority, when looked at historically. > > > > > Classics are the success of ethnic minorities once colour-bars are > > > > > destroyed and 'showtime' allowed. How many of our 'so valuable we'll > > > > > die without paying them small fortunes bwankers' would survive if we > > > > > introduced open examinations instead of the current old boy network? > > > > > Sadly, only the colour and class origins of the King Mice would change > > > > > as it has in the NFL and Premier League, if we don't change the > > > > > broader structures. > > > > > > The arguments are strange and complicated - simplexity might emerge if > > > > > we worked harder. What we try to do needs an understanding of > > > > > tolerance and a dropping of much almost iconographic levels of > > > > > remembered pain, whilst establishing a true history from which we can > > > > > work. Much of this history will be a history of failures and > > > > > unintended consequences. The question is partly about recognising > > > > > links between personal-individual virtue and social success. We have > > > > > been making do with greed and myth, including many about clarity and > > > > > certainty, many born in cultures equally unsuited to the current > > > > > crisis. I was going to send Ian some nappies as a gesture of help > > > > > with his problem, but obviously I should retain these for personal use > > > > > following Dr. Vam's diagnosis. > > > > > Sometimes what appears 'complex' might actually be the simplest way > > > > of achieving a goal. For that very reason, I see String Theory as the > > > > simplest 'physics' that can actually account for all that which is > > > > (and my take on string theory reduces the universe to a single entity-- > > > > it doesn't get any 'simpler' than that--that is, in structure, very > > > > complex.). The goal for the universe is unknown to us but extant in > > > > space-time, as the 'ends' are already a part of the whole, thus making > > > > the system teleological 'de-facto'. Assuming 'no goal' for the > > > > universe, to me, is not only short-sighted in that it overlooks the > > > > obvious implications of the geometry of space-time, but also just > > > > throws away the future simply because we don't have access to it. > > > > Truth is almost always stranger than fiction. > > > > > > It's sad to see cricket venues I once hoped to be good enough to grace > > > > > in Pakistan being blown to bits. Sadder still is the feeble Olympian > > > > > movement that can organise obsessive drug-cheats into a festival (has > > > > > there been a decent incident at such since the Black Power glove?) > > > > > from which we never learn we could organise projects that would bring > > > > > peace, security and something to want to do? > > > > > Entertainment is great, but not when those who can't afford > > > > entertainment are starving. In today's world, entertainment has > > > > become a priority industry and that. in my opinion, is a sign of > > > > serious social disease. Humanity needs to get it's priorities > > > > straight or we'll all choke (due to oxygen producing trees being cut > > > > down and/or burning and utilising the existing oxygen to burn the > > > > trees that produces oxygen) and starve WHILE we watch our 'circuses'. > > > > > > On 29 Oct, 12:07, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On 28 Oct, 18:05, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Good thoughts all, Pat, but as noted, idealistic and utopian. > > > > > > > Here's where > > > > > > > it breaks down: > > > > > > > > 1. The intelligent and socially responsible agree that > > > > > > > disarmament and > > > > > > > non-competitive cooperation is the ideal, and take steps to make > > > > > > > this a > > > > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > 2. The brutes and anti-socials (chavs, if you will), recognize > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > accurately as a weakness, and come take all the possessions, > > > > > > > liberties, and > > > > > > > virginities of the rest of the group. > > > > > > > > Darwin accurately noted the brutality of nature, and it's only > > > > > > > idealism and > > > > > > > rank utopianism that allows us to believe that it could be > > > > > > > anything else. > > > > > > > Those who are raised up without the ability to recognize this, > > > > > > > and compete > > > > > > > accordingly, fail in the inevitable competitions which WILL > > > > > > > occur. I'll buy > > > > > > > your dream when one day goes by on this planet that a woman is > > > > > > > not raped. > > > > > > > I completely agree that the world will always afford us > > > > > > competitions but that they can be won by us all if we combine our > > > > > > efforts. I have no problem with ideals or idealism, outside the > > > > > > fact > > > > > > that they aren't striven towards. Possessions are a misnomer, > > > > > > liberty > > > > > > fades in the face of a space-time continuum and viginity MUST fail > > > > > > if > > > > > > we are all to survive to the next generation. The brutes, as you > > > > > > call > > > > > > them, should then, as an act of compassion by the rest of us, be > > > > > > removed. No doubt that's why we have no more Neanderthals--perhaps > > > > > > the Cro-Magnon were more evolved spiritually and found that they HAD > > > > > > to remove the brutes in order to survive to OUR stage. > > > > > > If we want competitions in schools, rather than meaningless > > > > > > egg-n- > > > > > > spoon races, why not have a competition to reforest an area and > > > > > > reward > > > > > > the individual/class/school the excels in planting the most > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" 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/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
