Ham:
> An "event" is a specific happening in a specific
> place. This is the object
> of experience, and it is differentiated from other
> events and by the fact
> that it is experienced by individual subjects. You
> say that intellectual
> knowledge "can be one of integration, too," but can
> you suggest an example
> of an "integrated" concept, principle, or fact of
> knowledge? Even Pirsig's
> Quality is perceived as Goodness, Truth, Excellence,
> or Rightness, relative
> to something else.
SA: Yes, "Goodness, Truth, Excellence, (etc... are)
relative to something else." What is integrated above
is the point your trying to make, which is that
integration isn't known by you. The event was
differentiated between itself and another event, as
you say. But I wasn't differentiating one event with
another event. I'm talking about, for instance, this
whole event of me typing. What you do with this one
event called 'me typing' will be your doing, and since
your effort is to argue that an integrated concept
doesn't exist, then that's what you'll get - something
nonintegrated in your logic.
> [Ham]:
> > Subjectivity is rejected by Science. Scientific
> methodology
> > focuses entirely on objective data as interpreted
> by the intellect.
>
> [SA previously]:
> > No it's not, says who? Scientists know it is
> their subjectivity
> > in collaboration that decides how science will be
> interpreted.
> > Scientists are well aware of their methodology,
> their subjectivity,
> > may not be understanding the objective data that
> well, so
> > therefore, they do more tests, and ask others in
> different
> > geographies to do these tests. The more the same
> interpretation
> > is the outcome, the more reliable these
> interpretations become.
> > Philosophers sit with scientists in meetings and
> forums to help
> > discuss and sharpen the interpretation of data.
Ham:
> I think a group of scientific researchers meeting
> with philosophers would be
> a very rare event, unless it was to discuss the
> "philosophy of science".
SA: Well, you just threw that quote of Gould out the
window before you even read it, it would seem. If you
did read it, then you would have noticed how Gould
mentions how the collaboration of philosophers and
scientists in scientific research was a huge impact on
the evolution of scientific research, etc..., but you
would have to read the quote to know more of what I'm
referring to.
Ham:
> The repetition of experiments you speak of is part
> of the scientific method.
> It ensures that the conclusions reached by the
> original investigator are
> confirmed universally. But that's not a subjective
> discussion; they're all
> performing the same experiment under the same
> controlled conditions. That's
> what makes it "objective".
SA: What you know provides context to the experiment.
A scientist's observation of an experiment is
different than say a chef (and yes a chef probably
cooks better than a scientist, unless, the scientist
is a good cook and maybe even a chef too, anyways...).
Ham:
> A number of scientists, including Stephen Gould and
> Nicholas Maxwell have
> recently pressed for a more "socially oriented"
> approach to Science, but
> they are few in number and tend to be authors and
> professors rather than
> practicing scientists.
SA: Gould was not a practicing scientist, hahhahaha,
this is a joke, correct?
Ham:
> I found this summary of the
> 'The Scientific Method",
> which is more typical of this discipline:
> "The Scientific Method, through its testing of
> hypotheses, invites a kind of
> certainty absent from other approaches to knowledge,
> a universal validity
> that is not culture-bound. Anyone from any culture
> can perform the same
> experiment and get identical results. As long as we
> abide rigorously by the
> Scientific Method, we have a reliable way to
> distinguish fact from
> superstition, an intellectual razor that cuts
> through layers of cultural
> belief to get at the objective truth underneath.
> Finally, we are free from
> the bonds of subjectivity, the personal and cultural
> limits to
> understanding."
SA: Love is a universal understanding too.
dark,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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/
