As useful as math is for humans, the notion that “all of our reality must be defined mathematically” is outdated and just plain inaccurate … at least based upon our current level of mathematics.
On Aug 18, 8:50 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > I see what you're saying here Ash and can't help but think that all of > our reality must be defined mathematically. If I fart in a public > place and call the guy next me a nasty bastard, he'll denie that he > passed gas. If I just shrug my shoulders and imply that I'm in fact > the nasty basard who done the deed the effect is the same... everyone > smells my stench and I'm still the nasty bastard. If you come to my > house for dinner and lick the plate I would't think any less of you > but please excuse yourself before passing gas or you will not be > reinvited. No one wants to smell ass at the dinner table. The point is > that we each have our own formula for relationships and when we > process the information correctly the result comes out within > reasonable tolerances. > > On Aug 16, 2:48 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 8/9/2010 9:52 AM, Pat wrote: > > > > I think that usage is not particularly scientific but more > > > colloquial. Deane answer, below, is more the scientific view. Also, > > > we must remember that "good person" couldn't possibly apply to those > > > that are not "Homo Sapiens", yet evolution applies to ALL species. > > > Thus, even if I train my dog to have perfect "Western" table manners, > > > it's still not a 'good person'--might be a great dog and a helluva > > > canine, but not a good person. And, of course, table manners are no > > > show of evolution despite the fact that there are people who display > > > them who feel that they are "a product of better breeding"; whereas, > > > in truth, it might just be better 'training' (i.e., table manners is > > > little more than 'stupid human tricks' and certainly doesn't > > > demonstrate whether or not a person is 'good' or have any bearing on > > > their evolution). As an aside to this and to link them together in a > > > sideways kind of way, I suppose the habit that Englishmen have of > > > 'holding the knife with the right hand' whether or not the individual > > > is using it, MAY actually BE good evolution, as it affords them a > > > better chance at defending themselves if attacked whilst eating!! > > > I think this thread has covered habit, habitat and now habituation :), > > and I agree often walking and talking like one may be a sign, but then > > what is this 'duck' anyways? > > > Surprise a southpaw might keep the knife in the right for more practical > > reasons, one might want to reserve the greatest asset to flexible use, > > in a split second how many people will drop a knife for one of the > > dozens of other effective weapons at a dinner table. Well the thought > > crossed my mind recently when I wondered why I was cutting awkwardly > > with my right. I switched for ease but was annoyed at the fact this gave > > away tactical information. After consideration I decided it is best to > > keep a hot cup of coffee at the table, glass plates, and preferably a > > table/chairs with wooden legs and not bolted to the floor. There's large > > numbers of people around, all pretending to be caught up in little > > table-worlds, conspicuous consumption at it's best. Worst of all, I > > can't lick my plate. :( I should stand up before leaving and do that > > sometime just to see what it feels like, would I feel the cruching > > anxiety of people judging me or would I feel free? I could think to > > myself I feel free of judgement, while the onlookers would say look what > > society is devolving into. My secret is while most people would think > > this doglike behavior, I have pride in it, I remember how little most > > know of dogs (people, or reality) or what it is like to starve like one. > > Nothing directed at you personally Pat, just ranting somewhat in context.- > > Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -
