SA writes:
"What I've been waiting for on this forum for ca. 2
years, is for somebody to discuss science. I've heard
quite a bit on how the moq and science can fit. I
haven't heard the details that you provide below
though, and I welcome this approach. Krimel and at
times Ian, will point out some specifics in science,
but what is lacking is a full-fledged discussion about
the science of the day. People discuss, in this
forum, about how science does or does not fit in with
the moq, the whole moral issue and how the physical
sciences find no place for the human. The latter is
correct, from my ca. 5 year ago experience in the
university. The humanities and science were far away
from each other, and the philosophy department was
looking for ways to attract students again.
Philosophy lost its' application when science departed
over 100 years ago, it would seem. Philosophers are
constantly helping scientists develop their theories.
>From reading Stephen Gould's works, especially the
'The Structure of Evolutionary Theory', I didn't
realize the depth that scientists depend on good
philosophers in the complicated abstractions found in
theories. It would definitely help if you would talk
about science, and what science does today, and if you
have to, forget about the moq and how the moq fits in
with science, etc... "
=====
Jorge: I'm not sure if talking in general about
today's Science and "forgetting about the MOQ" would
be the right approach. I am sure that there are many
other sources, with people far learned than us in the
matter, concerned with general traits of contemporary
Science. IMO, what could be more useful is to discuss
selected topics which, for one reason or another, seem
to be of particular concern to MOQers.
A partial list of those topics (pretty difficult to
make a complete one)should perhaps include: the
standing of the S/O distinction in Science today, the
standing of causality, Values and Science and, of
course, Patterns (not of-Science but as scientific
concept). It looks quite a program and if we could get
through with just a small part of it would be plenty.
Because of being an avowed pragmatist, I'm far more
concerned in the possibilities of bridging between MOQ
and Science than in contrasting one against the other.
It looks to me that this bridging might be done
through Cybernetics and GST, but there might well be
other bridging points.
SA (continued):
Mention the science, in this
forum, provide some insight into what's happening.
Maybe we could all learn something. If you want to
discuss a certain theory, or experiment, or the
cutting edge in what science is up to, it would bring
a perspective into this forum that would be by in
large tremendous.
Jorge: I tend to agree with you on this bringing-in
particular theories or even experiments. Up to now
much of the discussion has been centered around
general propositions; discussing particular, concrete
examples may be useful to clarify general subjects.
SA (continued): So, instead of what the moq is
trying to do for science or science years ago, which
is interesting, undoubtly interesting, this forum
could use some science. Not that art, zen, and
politics isn't important, for I love to discuss the
former two and browse the latter, but it would be nice
to hear the science that you are referring to that the
moq should leave alone.
Comments?
Jorge: When asking Why not leave Science alone?I
was referring to a certain attitude of challenging
Science and/or looking for ways of modifying it. If,
in what I think is the spirit of your Post, we look at
Science with the intention of looking for thought
frameworks that could complement and enrich the MOQ
then, no need of leaving it alone. This is, if I
correctly understand parallel discussions, what is
been done here regarding Art, Zen and others. I see no
reason why to think of Science as an antagonist,
except perhaps the somewhat distorted views on it
distilled from Z&AMM.
___________________________________________________________
Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
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/
