User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 13 of 13

  1. #11
    WhoCares
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Do X, get result Y.

    What are your thoughts about my statement above?
    Not a fan. It implies that reality is fixed, rather than a product of present perceptions. Science, the great observor of reality, cannot definitively agree on reality because the more it learns through the current lens of perception the more anomalies it finds. Its not uncommon for science to come out and say....i know we said X but actually we can now prove thats not true. Reality, and therefore results, shift depending upon how it is viewed.

  2. #12

    Default

    Well, I was about to abandon this as a half-baked thread idea, but I think we drown in a sea of so called "knowledge" these days and being able to filter the deluge would be a very useful thing.

    My perspective matches that of @Coriolis quite well...due perhaps, to similar backgrounds. But I did not want to parallel Popper's demarcation of science, but rather something more broad.

    Big Data is soon going to pervade so many facets of our lives, and so much so that, I think, will give us a false sense of knowledge. I wanted to a say a little bit more than the aphorism so often repeated that it has become a meaningless platitude, "correlation does not imply causation".

    -------------------------------------
    Also, I think the usual notion of single causes leading to single effects is a woefully inadequate description of causation.

    I think a fairly simple decoupling is to note that causal mechanisms are rules that govern time evolution, while the effects and events are simply what happen during the time evolution. In this way, causes and effects are categorically different things. I suppose one can still ask what "caused" the rules. But the rules are not things that need causes. So I think the problem of infinite regress of causes looses its gravity with this conception (even if in some technical sense it is still there).
    ------------------------------------

    One of the predictions about the effects Big Data will have on society is that people have fewer second chances. That society will become more like Sparta, killing off diversity in the name of strength--A sort of Eugenics (but more broad, effecting more areas of our lives).

    I was looking for a safeguard, and I thought "corporeal mechanism" was the most natural one. Being careful here to note that even though the mechanistic events all happen in the corporeal world, the "causes" are more abstract rules that we only approximately describe in our conceptions.
    ------------------------------------

    Biochemistry puts back some of the complexity that genetics removes, as does pathology the complexity removed by epidemiology. When forced to tie our models to corporeal entities, we reintroduce some of the quirkiness, the chaos, and the complexity, that statistics tends to whitewash. `

    In marketing, we have the mass market and the long tail. We may not understand what that long tail is. But we can no longer ignore it, since it is that tail that now wags the dog.

    I see two belief systems that are going to collide in possibly violent opposition in our social context. One that aims for the simple, approximate, and efficient, the other that aims for the quirky, the accommodating, and diverse.
    -------------------------------------

    But we know that these systems need not come into violent conflict because they are in great harmony in the simpler aspects of our understanding--namely the understanding of the physical world of things. For me, this is a great sign of hope. That if we can reach this level of understanding, we do not need to chose between efficiency and diversity. We do not need to kill the week to be strong. The pareto principle does not have to be applied. Doors do not need to be slammed. Bridges need not be burnt. Earth need not be scorched.

    As things get more complex, it is harder to reach that same balance between efficiency and diversity in our understanding. But, I believe the guiding light can come from finding things that are corporeal and concrete to think about.

    I always found it interesting that for most things having to do with "reality" we usually associate with the "left brain" (analysis, collecting data, noting facts). The notable exception being the actual perception of reality, which we attribute to the "right brain". I still remember in art class the idea of perhaps looking at things upside down or at a different angle, so as to see what is actually there rather than our preconception of what is there.
    -------------------------------------

    I thought "Do X, get Y" was the simplest way to see (or perhaps more accurately feel) where the guiding light of corporeal reality is. Because until I have the impulse to do something, I can remain in blissful ignorance with impunity.

    Perhaps there is a better approach to this conglomeration of ideas.

    This was my attempt to revive the thread by providing the diversity of ideas that drove the question. Perhaps this post will land in the tl;dr category for many of you. But once again, efficiency vs. diversity.

    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

  3. #13
    Senior Member Zangetshumody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    472

    Default

    I don't know how relevant this might be to your topic;
    But my meta-type system of 17 stages is all about giving (or attaching) a certain response (or form of response) regarding a certain mental faculty and achieving a result of a certain character.

    The 17 stages can be roughly divided into a group of 8 and of 9, where the 8 are more earthly, and the above 9 are more ethereal (and heavenly). It bears mentioning that if you understand a cosmological order by my understanding;- "what things are", does not subsist in the world, however "what should be" does subsist in the world. In this way; generalizations and regularities can be enduring and unchanging (although I suspect we have not yet formulated them broadly enough in science to erect understandings that persevere at the same level as the axiomatic).

    I will give the first 3 stages as examples of the input output correlations:

    There is a lot of theological implication that one has to apply to these stages to offer full actualization of the higher stages... but hopefully these first 3 stages can be easy enough to view.
    The reason there is so much writing, is because the prior stage must first be working properly before you can get a basic input->output of the stage you want fruitful operation from.

    ----------------------

    A person whose type corresponds to stage 1: whose spirit of “what will be” wants to be the thing to receiveth “humility”, stage 17 must first be working properly:
    Therefore let the spirit of {stage 17’s faculty} “how things are” be the thing that determines [your:] ‘glory’ in the way you live your life; so the spirit of “how things are” is no longer the thing that determines ‘fear’ in the way you live your life.
    To clear your life from old judgments that accommodated your past style of spiritual misgiving: from now— always be cognizant to let the spirit of “how things would be” in others, be the thing that determines ‘understanding’ in the way others live their lives; so that any dislike of others being led by the spirit of “how things are”, as the thing that determines ‘glory’ in the way they live their life, is covered over and laid to rest. Therefore let the spirit of “what will be”, be the thing that determines [your:] ‘fear’ in the way you live your life.

    A person whose type corresponds to stage 2: whose spirit of “how things would be” wants to be the thing to receiveth ‘aware of darkness’, stage 1 must first be working properly:
    Therefore let the spirit of {stage 1’s faculty} “what will be” be the thing that determines [your:] ‘fear’ in the way you live your life; so the spirit of “what will be” is no longer the thing that determines ‘understanding’ in the way you live your life.
    To clear your life from old judgments that accommodated your past style of spiritual misgiving: from now— always be cognizant to let the spirit of “who I am” in others, be the thing that determines ‘outside authority’ in the way others live their lives; so that any dislike of others being led by the spirit of “what will be”, as the thing that determines ‘fear’ in the way they live their life, is covered over and laid to rest. Therefore let the spirit of “how things would be”, be the thing that determines [your:] ‘understanding’ in the way you live your life.


    A person whose type corresponds to stage 3: whose spirit of “who I am” wants to be the thing to receiveth ‘aware of multiplicity’, stage 2 must first be working properly:
    Therefore let the spirit of {stage 2’s faculty} “how things would be” be the thing that determines [your:] ‘understanding’ in the way you live your life; so the spirit of “how things would be” is no longer the thing that determines ‘outside authority’ in the way you live your life.
    To clear your life from old judgments that accommodated your past style of spiritual misgiving: from now— always be cognizant to let the spirit of “what should be” in others, be the thing that determines ‘generalization’ in the way others live their lives; so that any dislike of others being led by the spirit of “how things would be”, as the thing that determines ‘understanding’ in the way they live their life, is covered over and laid to rest. Therefore let the spirit of “who I am”, be the thing that determines [your:] ‘outside authority’ in the way you live your life.

    (side note: "who" means "how you are known"- or the image of your being)
    Escape powerful genjitsu by averting your gaze from the eyes.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] INTJ trying to understand an ENFP's actions (PART 2)
    By thescientist in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 09-04-2009, 12:03 AM
  2. [ENFP] INTJ trying to understand an ENFP's actions
    By thescientist in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 154
    Last Post: 08-30-2009, 04:58 AM
  3. [ISFP] Friend need some help in understanding ISFP actions!
    By pecan111 in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-13-2009, 12:46 AM
  4. Understanding invisible threads that change how actions are judged.
    By Athenian200 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 261
    Last Post: 04-11-2008, 05:52 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Help Understanding my ESFX Cousin
    By Varelse in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-09-2007, 06:13 AM

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