Sounds a lot like Zoroastrianism to me.
Seriously, errands to run, etc Will try to reply later. Billy -------------------------------------------------------------------- 10/20/2011 3:31:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: [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_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/manifesto/) 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_ (http://philosophybites.libsyn.com/hugh-mellor-on-frank-ramsey-on-truth) _Redundancy theory of truth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundancy_theory_of_truth) 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_ (http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) Radical Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/) -- 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
