[Since Billy called me out for using this term without explanation...]
Dr. Ernie steps to the Centroids podium...
As I think I mentioned before, I'm "done" with philosophy -- I've moved on to
zoasophy. Zoasophy is related to Philosophy the way Engineering is related to
Science -- the goal is to actually *build* systems that work, not just think.
The word "zoasophy" means "liver of wisdom", in contrast to philosophy which
means "lover of wisdom." It comes from the greek word "Zoa" meaning life, as
in zoology and Zoe Girl. Not "liver" as in the bodily organ -- that would be
hepatosophy. :-) And Billy, there's no "R" in zoasophy: deal with it.
The foundational principle of Zoasophy is:
The Truth is What Works
What Works is not the Truth
That is, the ultimate test of truth is whether it actually works. At the same
time, just because something works does not mean it is true. Truth emerges
from repeated examination of results and competing hypotheses, as encapsulated
in my Radical Centrist Manifesto:
Manifesto « Radical Centrism
As such, zoasophy shares much in common with pragmatism, in that we care about
the "cash value" of ideas. But where pragmatism is traditionally analytic --
trying to uncover truth -- zoasophy is primarily synthetic, trying to construct
useful (if imperfect) truths. It is similar to what little I understand of
Frank Ramsay's approach to truth:
Hugh Mellor on Frank Ramsey on Truth
Redundancy theory of truth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Zoasophy is closed related to "prefuturism", another neologism I toss around.
The pre-future is -- obviously! -- what comes after the post-modern. :-)
More specifically, a prefuturist believes we are continually creating a future
with a deeper understanding of truth and reality, but we aren't there yet --
and never will be. Everything we make is flawed and imperfect, and usually in
some ways worse than what went before, but overall we can move things
incrementally forward.
Thus, zoasophers believe in the improvability but not perfectibility of human
constructs -- including perhaps our selves. In particular, we believe that
rational arguments can approximate but not quite capture the real world. That
is, our mathematical and conceptual models can become extremely good at
capturing many aspects of the real world, but our only partial approximations,
and must continually be tested against reality -- especially in new contexts.
Ultimately, the real test of a zoasopher is not what they say, but how they
live. Or rather, their ability to actually live as they say they will, and
achieve the results they claim for the reasons they provide.
Which is why, as a good zoasopher, I should probably stop talking about it and
go back to practicing it...
Now you know.
-- Ernie P.
Dr. Ernie leaves the stage
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
