At 01:24 PM 3/12/2009, you wrote:
>[Krimel]
>This, and your ongoing mantra about killing ALL conceptual patterns are
>simply absurd. You rendering all communication as meaningless as bird song.
>You would reduce us all to grunting our emotions without reflection. Nature
>has bestowed upon us the gift of finding meaning. She gives us the tools to
>share that meaning with each other. You would throw it back in her face,
>content with a head full of immediate sense impressions, heedless of the
>past and unconcerned about the future. It's like you are claiming that the
>ultimate state of being would be a persistent vegetative state.
>
>That seems to be YOUR conception of the world, all that way down. It seems
>to me if ever a concept deserved a bullet to the head, your concept would
be
>the one.
Marsha
This is how you address my post, by accusation, by moving the onus?
If it comes to deciding on something based on chicken entrails,
theological sermon, experimentation or your thinking, I'll choose
experimentation, but that would be experimentation, even scientific
experimentation, considered with a certain amount of skepticism and
epistemological humility both which seem to go missing when you speak
of Science.
[Krimel]
All of your methods involved conceptualization. Whatever we say IS
conceptual. And yet whatever gets said you dismiss as being JUST concepts...
all the way down. If you kill concepts, all of them, what are you left with?
I would also point out that all of science and all experimentation is an
exercise in skepticism and epistemological humility. That is why I
personally pay attention to it. If that strikes you are lacking in humility
I think you are missing the entire point of the exercise.
Krimel,
'Killing' is a word with a negative connotation, but I'm not killing
anything. I am trying to investigate what I can know and how I can
know it. Science is conventional knowledge and IS based on
conceptual constructs all the way down. I never said that makes
science useless, only that it is not a reflection of ultimate
reality. And we've been though the fact that underpinning science
today is politics and economics which does affect pattern bias.
[Marsha]
I was asking you about the relationship between thought and brain
activity, whether the relationship was causal or a correlation. I
was asking you about the brain science you often suggest your
knowledge reflects. You gave some examples of why, you thought, it
was an obvious and indisputable correlation. Then you seemed to say
the relationship was causal based on 'I personally believe' and 'I
think'. Do you blame me for being stunned?
[Krimel]
Well, yes, I am stunned that you are stunned. What sort of answers to you
expect. How could anything I say in this forum ever be interpreted as being
other than what "I personally believe"? I can and do attempt to add what
leads me to a particular conclusion as I have done in this case. In fact I
spelled out explicitly that I agree with a particular scientific approach to
the question you asked. To wit: the causes of behavior and I would adding
thoughts are:
1) Biology
2) Personal History
3) Present circumstances
Thinking and acting are processes that result for these three "causes".
Based on what? Now if you want to define science as whatever you
think, that's fine with me. In that case, I will even apologize for
expecting an answer accompanied by or pointing to some kind of evidence.
All
of them are necessary but none are sufficient. Brain chemistry is biological
and necessary for thought but it is not sufficient to produce it. A dead
brain has essentially the same chemistry as a live one.
Regardless, if I say that any relation is causal or if I state that the sky
is blue, these are statements of personal belief.
Not a very strong case, yet you seem to assume all the prestige of
Science and the scientific method.
Marsha
.
_____________
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.
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/
