User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 58

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    I was saying that the vase is defined by both what makes it up, the clay, and what doesn't, the space within it. If the space wasn't there, it wouldn't be a vase. Therefore it is defined by both what exists (the clay) and what doesn't exist (the space). It is simultaneously defined objectively (the clay) and relativistically (the space). I can't really explain a duality any better than that. Give it some time to sink in.
    Lets take even an atom. It is is made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, as well as space between them. Granted, each of these things are more like quantum smears where the "space" and "matter" actually "mix." But an atom isn't an atom without the space either.

    I just don't see anything relative about space. Granted, there is no "ether" to act as a universal reference frame for everything. But space exists objectively as well. Or am I misinterpreting further?

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  2. #12
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Lets take even an atom. It is is made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, as well as space between them. Granted, each of these things are more like quantum smears where the "space" and "matter" actually "mix." But an atom isn't an atom without the space either.

    I just don't see anything relative about space. Granted, there is no "ether" to act as a universal reference frame for everything. But space exists objectively as well. Or am I misinterpreting further?
    How is space objective? It can only be measured and perceived relatively.

    I'm getting the feeling that you are just being difficult and disagreeable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    How is space objective? It can only be measured and perceived relatively.
    The Elements of Psychology: A Text-book - Google Book Search

    The quote is included to point out that I am not unique in believing in the objectivity of space.

    If the town in which I live is outside me, then the space in which I stand is also outside me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    I'm getting the feeling that you are just being difficult and disagreeable.
    I'm not sure what I said to give that impression, but I was actually trying to clarify my own understanding of what your were saying.

    To me space makes up most of objective reality.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  4. #14
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    From your book, I'm more interested in this quote.

    "...empty space is nothing more than relative distance of extended objects from each other, measured on a standard similar to that which applies to the bodies themselves.
    The quote you are using is also using a relative means of defining space.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    From you book, I'm more interested in this quote.



    The quote you are using is also using a relative means of defining space.
    I may have read it wrong, but I believe that was actually a quote within a quote. They were arguing against Kant's belief in the relative nature of space (which I didn't understand either).

    I hope you don't think I am trying to nit-pick are argue for the sake of arguing here (in-fact, I'm deliberately trying to not argue my belief in the objectivity of space).

    I honestly can't fathom why space should be thought of as relative. How is space any different from the matter (which also needs an observer to be observed) that is in space?

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  6. #16
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I may have read it wrong, but I believe that was actually a quote within a quote. They were arguing against Kant's belief in the relative nature of space (which I didn't understand either).

    I hope you don't think I am trying to nit-pick are argue for the sake of arguing here (in-fact, I'm deliberately trying to not argue my belief in the objectivity of space).

    I honestly can't fathom why space should be thought of as relative. How is space any different from the matter (which also needs an observer to be observed) that is in space.
    Well I suppose that is the topic for another thread. I don't want to get too far off track the premise of this thread. Mainly, the universe is composed of two realities, the objective and relativistic, which simultaneously exist and are both necessary to understand the structure and function of the universe. If you are having difficulty comprehending dualities then I suggest reading some Taoist texts. They have been very influential in my thinking, especially in understanding the perception of separation. But I did suggest some other dualities. Opposite sides of a coin, cold and hot, etc. And you didn't seem to contest those, so I'm guessing you have some idea of what I am talking about.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Well I suppose that is the topic for another thread. I don't want to get too far off track the premise of this thread. Mainly, the universe is composed of two realities, the objective and relativistic, which simultaneously exist and are both necessary to understand the structure and function of the universe. If you are having difficulty comprehending dualities then I suggest reading some Taoist texts. They have been very influential in my thinking, especially in understanding the perception of separation. But I did suggest some other dualities. Opposite sides of a coin, cold and hot, etc. And you didn't seem to contest those, so I'm guessing you have some idea of what I am talking about.
    Yes. Probably better left to a different thread. Somehow all the dualities seem like mere conventions (wave-particle being a major exception).

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  8. #18
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Yes. Probably better left to a different thread. Somehow all the dualities seem like mere conventions (wave-particle being a major exception).
    Well that was quite the backhanded comment. :steam:

    If you had provided some reasoning behind why you thought they were "mere conventions" then I wouldn't think so, but as a parting remark that is simply rude.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Well that was quite the backhanded comment. :steam:

    If you had provided some reasoning behind why you thought they were "mere conventions" then I wouldn't think so, but as a parting remark that is simply rude.
    Sorry. Please note that if I'm rude, I don't intend to be.

    Mind if I start another thread on duality and take the discussion there? Unless you want to.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  10. #20
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Sorry. Please note that if I'm rude, I don't intend to be.

    Mind if I start another thread on duality and take the discussion there? Unless you want to.
    No, not at all. It's 4 in the morning and I'm getting testy, so I'm off to bed. I'll look forward to your discussion after some sleep.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

Similar Threads

  1. Elfboy's theory on the Light Worker, the Dark Worker and Objectivism
    By Elfboy in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 03-28-2013, 02:29 PM
  2. altruism vs objectivism and type
    By INTP in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-25-2012, 02:46 AM
  3. [NT] Theory vs application, overcoming analysis paralysis?
    By ObliviousExistence in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-29-2010, 03:31 PM
  4. Hyperfocus and the hunter vs. farmer theory.
    By ajblaise in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-27-2009, 11:06 AM
  5. Type Theory vs. Temperament Theory
    By proteanmix in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-19-2007, 10:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO