Please, David, stop patronizing me in this
ridiculous fashion. Your condescension only serves as a temptation to contempt.
The problem has nothing to do with the amount of detail I can hold in my mind;
if anything, it is the reverse. But the real issue for me has never
been mere quantity of data--it is the presence or absence of richness
of connection. Indeed, your mathematical example is backwards. Your approach to
most topics is extremely linear and unidimensional, and that is precisely
my objection.
As for building a car, it is not at
all like evolving an eye! I ought to have known better, as you
simply do not get either the point of specific analogies or the purpose of
analogies in general. Analogies are not arguments; they are explanations,
illustrations, invitations to intellectual empathy (as it were).
Debbie
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Spirit
>> I thought of a way to explain why I shrink from what
>> you call reductionism. To me, it is like trying to evolve
>> the whole eye or wing one feature at a time.
>
> Yeah, what's wrong with that? In high school I took my Volkswagon engine
> apart, every bolt, and then put it all back together again. It was a lot of
> work, but well worth the effort. I now understood that engine and
> everything about it.
>
> When I taught Vertebrate Biology, I had my students dissect sharks and cats.
> Why? Reductionism. If they wanted to understand how animals work and are
> put together, you have to cut them open, learn the musculature, circulatory,
> and nervous system. Then understanding increases as they are compared with
> one another.
>
> I do recognize that everybody has a threshold for the amount of details they
> can abstractly hold in their mind. When I was working on my Master's
> degree, my professors had trouble with some non-linear regression analysis I
> did on the data. I understood what was going on because I had immersed
> myself in the mathematics of it all. They had not immersed themselves in
> the math, and really didn't like math all that much to begin with, so in
> order to make it more understandable to them, I had to transform my data
> through a mathematical formula to create a linear regression analysis. Then
> they could find agreement with my conclusions. I guess it is kind of like
> how some people can think in 3 or 4 dimensions while others are taxing their
> brains to think in 2 dimensions.
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
>
>
