User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 84

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    Yes, but problems come when chiseling away causes the foundation to change. The problem becomes non-linear. Then you can't chisel away and expect to find something that was always there to begin with. But instead you can frame an understanding of these changes by using relative foundations and throw out the idea of an absolute one.
    The solution to that seems simple. If the sculpture crumbles, it was not meant to be (at least part of this world).

    If you don't want anything to crumble, don't chisel. But if one refuses to ever chisel then one will never give any form. Seems like a good way to do nothing.

    We don't need to appeal to things we don't understand to make a case for the points we want to make. If quantum mechanics or relativity (both introduced in freshman science classes) required completely abandoning objective reality, I think we would have been teaching this by now.

    These particular things are indeed counterintuitive. But what parts of quantum mechanics are "non-linear"? What does "non-linearity" have to with abandoning the notion of objective reality? These points were certainly not made clear in "Transgressing the Boundaries".

    ------
    Please see my disclaimer, and my response to @Amalie Muller (who may or may not be playing Devil's Advocate). I did not divulge the circumstances for publication so that people give their honest opinions of the subject matter. I doubted that people would engage in debate if they knew the circumstances.

    Nevertheless, I did not expect someone living in 2014, when we are 3D printing organs, making computer chips with 10s of billions of transistors, and have found evidence of the Higgs Boson, to have a particularly good response to an article invoking the bogey man of "non-linearity" as a work of scholarship.

    Again, my intention was never to embarrass anyone. This was meant as a test example of how to handle a situation where people are making ridiculous claims.

    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. #42

    Default

    Just to make clear that it is not the conclusions themselves that I find ridiculous but the means by which he reaches them, here is a video that I found much more reasonable that comes to similar (though not the same) conclusions:

    How Better Register the Agency of Things: Semiotics | bruno-latour.fr
    How Better to Register the Agency of Things: Ontology | bruno-latour.fr

    This form of argument is coherent, and I find valuable. It gives food for thought, and consider things that I find reasonable instead of reasonable. Although there were some bombastic statements, they were made metaphorically.

    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. #43
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Actually, it's because if you have 2 dollars and I give you 4 more, you now have 6; no more, no less. I would love to be able to make my 2+4 dollars equal 6000 instead, but reality just doesn't work that way. Mathematics based on emotional evaluations is no longer mathematics, but some other "discipline", perhaps numerology. Whatever its merits, it should not be called by the name of something that it is not.
    To be honest, I just thought it was a funny thing to write, and I LOVE the fact you and a couple other people not only took it seriously, but were annoyed enough by my idea of "feminist emotion-based mathematics" (lol) to waste a few seconds of your lives seriously arguing against a strange idea that nobody actually believes in (probably).

  4. #44
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    i agree with you. and thusly our consensus makes it a social truth, and therefore equals objective reality.

    what the dumb idiot writing the article is trying to speak of are in fact crimes of fallacy committed by the world public.
    but he approaches the topic without really acknowledging his own assertion, and doesn't know how to write english

    a lot of readers might think this is over their head because he uses a lot of 13+ word sentences [which cover 3 word concepts] and long words. be not fooled, friends. in fact this is plainly diarrhea of the mouth, at its worst

    ygolo i don't understand why any energy is being spent on such an intellectually desolate article.
    The author is not an idiot. He purposely wrote the article like this, as a test.

  5. #45
    Google "chemtrails" Bush Did 9/11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    MBTI
    eNtp
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    γ Ni
    Posts
    4,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Actually, it's because if you have 2 dollars and I give you 4 more, you now have 6; no more, no less. I would love to be able to make my 2+4 dollars equal 6000 instead, but reality just doesn't work that way. Mathematics based on emotional evaluations is no longer mathematics, but some other "discipline", perhaps numerology. Whatever its merits, it should not be called by the name of something that it is not.
    Behavioral economics. It's a hella neat field.
    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    To be honest, I just thought it was a funny thing to write, and I LOVE the fact you and a couple other people not only took it seriously, but were annoyed enough by my idea of "feminist emotion-based mathematics" (lol) to waste a few seconds of your lives seriously arguing against a strange idea that nobody actually believes in (probably).
    But almost everyone's time, including yours, was wasted. But mine wasn't, because I barely bothered to pay attention to the article in the first place.
    J. Scott Crothers
    aka "Bush Did 9/11"
    Founder, Truthtology, est. 1952
    Prophet and Channel, God Almighty
    Author, the Holy scripture Elevenetics

    "Just as jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, so too cannot the unshakeable pillars of Truthtology ever be shaken, whether by man, nature, or evidence."
    - Elevenetics

  6. #46
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jscrothers View Post
    Behavioral economics. It's a hella neat field.

    But almost everyone's time, including yours, was wasted. But mine wasn't, because I barely bothered to pay attention to the article in the first place.
    My time wasn't wasted, as I had fun writing these posts, and enjoyed reading the article. What's a better use of time than enjoying yourself??

    It's a great article. You'd have a hard job finding a funnier pseudo-science parody than this. The author wrote it brilliantly.

  7. #47
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    But is that what science believes or what you believe? Honest question, first thing that came to mind after reading that.
    It is not a belief, but rather an observation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    Okay, but this doesn't really address the distinction I made.
    Then that distinction was not clear in your post. Please clarify. The distinction I am making here is that science concerns itself with absolute truth, inasmuch as that can be determined, and not relative truth. Science as a discipline does not need both.

    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    To be honest, I just thought it was a funny thing to write, and I LOVE the fact you and a couple other people not only took it seriously, but were annoyed enough by my idea of "feminist emotion-based mathematics" (lol) to waste a few seconds of your lives seriously arguing against a strange idea that nobody actually believes in (probably).
    It's probably a waste of my time to lock my doors when I leave each day, except for the day that a thief finally comes to call. Plus then I can set a good example for the neighborhood.

    It's sad, but there are plenty of people who believe this kind of BS, and I say "believe" deliberately, to mean "accept in the absence of evidence". It is only slightly more subtle and less worrisome than this.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  8. #48
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    The author is not an idiot. He purposely wrote the article like this, as a test.
    that makes him even more of an idiot.
    we fukin won boys

  9. #49
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    that makes him even more of an idiot.
    I disagree. His aim was to try to get a nonsensical pseudo-scientific "left-leaning" article published by a "serious" intellectual magazine, in order to show how little critical rigor there was in these types of magazines. And it WAS published, so he did a great job, and made his point. You can (or could at the time) get just about ANYTHING published as long as they sounded good (ie. Intellectual), you were a recognized scientist, and the conclusion supported the "left-wing bias" of the publication.

  10. #50
    Google "chemtrails" Bush Did 9/11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    MBTI
    eNtp
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    γ Ni
    Posts
    4,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    It's a great article. You'd have a hard job finding a funnier pseudo-science parody than this. The author wrote it brilliantly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    His aim was to try to get a nonsensical pseudo-scientific "left-leaning" article published by a "serious" intellectual magazine, in order to show how little critical rigor there was in these types of magazines. And it WAS published, so he did a great job, and made his point. You can (or could at the time) get just about ANYTHING published as long as they sounded good (ie. Intellectual), you were a recognized scientist, and the conclusion supported the "left-wing bias" of the publication.
    I finally wasted some time myself and read it.

    I wasn't aware that it was a well-planned hoax until you pointed it out. I got had.

    For those interested in the context (i.e. beyond face value) behind the article, there's an article about the "Sokal affair" in the grandest academic source, Wikipedia. Turns out that the whole thing is as neat as that one modest proposal that suggests that we eat babies.

    Turns out that circumvention of established norms, to the point of absurdity, gets people talking about our own deep-seated assumptions. Raises fundamental questions that we're forced to address. Not a bad thing.
    J. Scott Crothers
    aka "Bush Did 9/11"
    Founder, Truthtology, est. 1952
    Prophet and Channel, God Almighty
    Author, the Holy scripture Elevenetics

    "Just as jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, so too cannot the unshakeable pillars of Truthtology ever be shaken, whether by man, nature, or evidence."
    - Elevenetics

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. The Madmin Blog
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 05:40 AM
  3. Muhammad (S.A.W.) cartoons and the boundaries of satire
    By figsfiggyfigs in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 07-25-2011, 07:07 PM
  4. Eileen (to the left)
    By Eileen in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 07:55 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