Jorge:
> 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,
SA: Yes. That's what I mean. Do you know? I
remember back to when I was in the university ca. 5
years ago, and how, in a private discussion with my
astronomy professor, she stated that astronomy is
about what 'you can see'. It is data based. It is
not what you think, she said, but what you see and
observe. It was the pure notion of observation
separated from thought. That was her take on it.
Culture, for I brought this up, since I was studying
anthropology, did not impact the conclusions of
astronomical observation studies. She stated you
could not conclude culture exists according to
observation due to you can't see culture. Now, if you
want to know, today, today, as in March 10, 2008,
well, I don't know.
Jorge:
> the standing of causality, Values and Science and,
SA: Yes, exactly. Since you seem to be knowledgable
enough to state that Pirsig's views are outdated, then
how does current science stand in relation to the moq
or values, etc...?
Jorge:
> 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.
SA: Yes. And you bringing this up, these
'wonderings' of yours you mention above, then it would
be helpful to see your take on these issues. I don't
know if your waiting for somebody to step in and
answer all of these or if you have an idea that you
wish to share concering these topics.
Jorge:
> 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: What is cybernetics and GST?
> SA previously (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: Agreed.
> 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.
SA: I see what you mean now. I was beginning to
think that you meant that the moq and science can't
complement each other. I intuited this wasn't wholly
true, or why else would you like to chat about the
moq, and why else would you state ZMM and Lila
inspired something in you. But I couldn't see any
explicit statements as to how the moq and science fit
in inspirition. So, yes, I'm all for the
complimentation of the moq and science to not be left
alone.
Jorge:
> 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.
SA: I definitely don't find science antagonistic to
the moq or vice versa.
Thanks.
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
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/
