Quoting Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [Krimel] > I am certainly willing to reconsider. Especially when I find anti-Randian > liberialisms like this coming from Einstein: > > "A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are > based on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert > myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still > receiving..."
. . . which does not detract one iota from the magnificence of his individual achievements. > I believe what both men are talking about is exactly what you previously > claimed not to understand about how physicists see things. When and what did I claim not to understand about how physicists see things? > Beauty in this > sense refers to elegance of thought, harmony of concepts and simplicity. It > has to so with seeing the connections between apparently disparate things. I don't think beauty in "this sense" is experienced any differently than the than the beauty felt listening to a Rachmaninoff concerto. > It is why it in not scientists who are missing an aesthetic sense so much as > romantics who find ugliness in what they are unwilling or unable to > understand. Come to think of it perhaps it is the whole idea of > understanding that is beautiful and failure to understand that is ugly. Depends on what you consider to be "understanding." From what I gather from your exchange of views with DMB what you consider to be in the realm of understanding is somewhat limited. > But as I said this is not my thing so I could well be missing it. Perhaps, but I suspect you have "blown away" by something beautiful more than once. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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/
