I problably should, now that I am actually commenting on something of possible (the word "possible" being ironic, now that we're discussing Chaos Theory) value at the moment (the word "value" also being ironic, as this is the MOQ discussion forum), introduce myself. I am Matt F, not the other Matt.
[Platt] > Since in the MOQ Quality, morality and reality are all the same, I would > conclude that -- to Pirsig at least -- Quality is about as close to > universal truth as you can get. If this is true, why not just use the much more explainable term "reality"? Then we would have a forum about the MOR, and, if, like you say, they are all really the same thing, much misappropration would be avoided. For the moment, I'll leave my question at that. [Krimel] >In the vacuum of space I >predict a brief period of gasping before becoming inert. Actually, were you in space, you would explode (given that there is no pressure in space). Not that it matters much, anyways (excepting that given that you didn't explode, science would have difficulty expplaining itself) [Krimel] >Weather forecasting is enormously more accurate to today than it was even 20 >years ago. I live in the path of storms I attend to such things. As I have >told you before insurance, polling, market analysis, casinos, sports, >advertising, hell think of any area of human endeavor that is not actively >involved in formalizing its intuitions to improve its probability of >success. Name anything that we do that is not about manipulating >probabilities and patterns to remove uncertainty from our future. While weather forecasting has improved, among other things, this is not due to Chaos Theory. Science (or typical science) assumes, contrary to Chaos theory, that if we knew everything there was to know about weather we would predict the outcome 100% of the time. Weather forecasting is not just about manipulating probabilities and patterns; it comes from knowledge about how weather works, and using that knowledge to predict outcomes. Our increased accuracy on weather is due to increased knowledge about weather, and is completely unrelated to Chaos theory. [Platt] >This strikes me as an ordinary paradox having nothing to do with paradigm >shifts. Paradigm shifts? Am I right in assuming we have all read *The Structure of Scientific Revolutions*? > [Krimel] > So you think we as a people should ignore the sick and hungry? Yes, I agree with Platt that we should encourage people to be responsible for themselves. This doesn't apply to everyone, however, as many people (such as children, the sick, etc.) cannot be responsible for themselves. On Dec 1, 2007 4:34 AM, Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [Krimel] > > I think he saw it but didn't have the tools to apply it. Again a finger > > pointing at he knows not what. > > > > "Since a metaphysics is essentially a kind of dialectical definition and > > since Quality is essentially outside definition, this means that a > > 'Metaphysics of Quality' is essentially a contradiction in terms, a > > logical absurdity. It would be almost like a mathematical definition of > > randomness. The more you try to say what randomness is the less random > it > becomes." > > [Platt] > This strikes me as an ordinary paradox having nothing to do with paradigm > shifts. > > [Krimel] > Ordinary paradox? There's and oxymoron for you. Probability theory is a > mathematics of randomness. As a said Pirsig sees where this elads but > doesn't have the tools. > > > [Krimel] > > So you think we as a people should ignore the sick and hungry? > > [Platt] > We as a people should encourage people to be responsible for themselves. > But what has that got to do with chaos theory? > > [Krimel] > This has to do with morals, at the moment. At if people fail to be > responsible for themselves? Fuck 'em? > > I have explained Chaos theory to you several times now. What part of it > don't you get? > > > [Krimel] > > Because formalizing what we do instinctively improves efficiency. It > > betters our probability estimates. > > [Platt] > It does? Can you cite some examples where QM and/or chaos theory > improves the efficiency of our daily lives? I haven't notice much > improvement in weather forecasting over the years if that's what you have > in mind. Maybe there are uses for the theories in scientific labs and > engineering, but I can't imagine much application by me or the average > non- > technical dude. > > [Krimel] > Weather forecasting is enormously more accurate to today than it was even > 20 > years ago. I live in the path of storms I attend to such things. As I have > told you before insurance, polling, market analysis, casinos, sports, > advertising, hell think of any area of human endeavor that is not actively > involved in formalizing its intuitions to improve its probability of > success. Name anything that we do that is not about manipulating > probabilities and patterns to remove uncertainty from our future. > > >From prayer in church to the Dow Jones average; this is who we are. It is > what we do. > > > [Krimel] > > Yes we should and have been generous to our enemies. We do embrace > > Judeo-Christian ethics in this country. I rather like them. It is > > Christian theology that tends to be problematic. > > [Platt] > What about the theology do you find problematic? The existence of God? > Jesus as God's son? Life after death for believers? All of the above? > > [Krimel] > All of the above. But what about you? What kind of moral code do you see > filling the universe, claiming that it is better to exist than not, but > adding, tough titty on the poor and sick? Do you accept Christian theology > and reject its ethic? > > > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > -- "The only thing that separates us from the animals is...well, the truth is nothing separates us from the animals." Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
