[Kevin] , Yes. I mentioned the function that rounds to the nearest whole number because I remembered you said you and your daughter had seen this play out on a calculator. And I mentioned this because it is something altogether different from the problems of precision and measurement. Setting a machine to filter its output is different from being able to repeat and reproduce the same input to the machine (e.g., measuring device).
[Ron] This is exactly the point, a machine needs to filter its input/output.. So it may repeat and reproduce This data... It repeats and reproduces by filtering it's input in the same way (a defined limit). To arrive at an assumed absolute value. When you say "Setting a machine to filter its output is different from being able to repeat and reproduce the same input to the machine (e.g., measuring device)". What you are saying is percieving accuracy is different than Communicating that perceived accuracy. Which is what Bohr said about the observation of subatomic phenomena in quantum philosophy. Using math to support philosphical argument, I see mathmatics as the symbolic representation Of the function of the human mind. It is a direct function of the limit. The human mind see's pattern and form and perfection because it is a creature of simplification and exaggeration. It percieves perfection from chaos because that is what it does. It sets the limit Of perception and simplifies it into perfect forms to process and store repeat and reproduce for easy recall to be Utilized in every waking moment of conscious experience. Perfect Form is the function of the brains ability to percieve data in terms that it Can understand and use. That is why the search for objective truth led to between our own ears ..science had gotten To the point where what we can know about objective reality is limited by what we can Percieve and communicate about objective reality. Having said this, it puts Hams ontology into perspective insofar as the primary Function of the brain is to filter and simplify the infinate into the finate. Therefore what we intellectualize is a seemingly finate experience of subject and object In space. This is what I was trying to convey to Bo. That the sheer focus on the Levels was only going to yield more simplification and exaggeration and less accuracy. Pirsig states that MOQ is aware of this function of the brain and to take this fact Into consideration when intellectualizing SOM. that SOM is not absolute but is generally taken as such on an everyday assumed subconscouse basis. 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/
