User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 84

  1. #51
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jscrothers View Post
    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.
    Hah! I didn't bother reading who wrote the paper before I commented on it. If I had, I'd have known what I was dealing with. I never actually read any of Sokal's writing, and I didn't remember the title, but I was well aware of the project.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #52
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jscrothers View Post
    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.
    Haha I was hoping someone would defend the article and all its claims, but nobody did (except me for the fun of it haha, but that doesn't really count). XD

    I think if the OP didn't mention how "absurd" the ideas were, and just said, "Hey what do you lot think of this?" it would have made a much more interesting conversation.

  3. #53
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    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".
    Well, I didn't say quantum mechanics or relativity abandons objective reality, but it does abandon notions of an absolute reality. And they are not the same things as I understand them, though I imagine we understand their meaning differently.

    Basically, non-linearity relates mainly to computer systems where what you get out of a system doesn't solely depend on what inputs you give it, but on the state the system was in at the time of giving it inputs; however the state of the system changes when you give it inputs. The problem is that when this happens, the system is hard to verify in a scientific sense because there is no basic foundation for verification. You'd instead have to find a relationship that explains how the system is changing in its non-linear fashion. Now add to the fact that you don't know all the states of the system and it becomes very hard to know quantum mechanics with any degree of absolute knowledge - one oxygen atom may behave differently than another under the same conditions. And it does throw into question some of the basic assumptions we make about things. Because if two oxygen atoms can behave differently in quantum mechanics, yet function the same in classical mechanics, then whether they are the same or not depends on how you look at or use them. And the same goes for relativity, where classical mechanics works when Special Relativity becomes negligible, but doesn't apply when dealing with speeds close to the speed of light. And it throws some of the basic assumptions that there is an absolute reality into question.

    The article doesn't mention this specifically, but it does talk about this somewhat haphazardly and indirectly, I think assuming the reader is already aware of what the writer is saying. It's not a very good article, but there is an argument for questioning the idea of an absolute reality.

  4. #54
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    Well, I didn't say quantum mechanics or relativity abandons objective reality, but it does abandon notions of an absolute reality. And they are not the same things as I understand them, though I imagine we understand their meaning differently.

    Basically, non-linearity relates mainly to computer systems where what you get out of a system doesn't solely depend on what inputs you give it, but on the state the system was in at the time of giving it inputs; however the state of the system changes when you give it inputs. The problem is that when this happens, the system is hard to verify in a scientific sense because there is no basic foundation for verification. You'd instead have to find a relationship that explains how the system is changing in its non-linear fashion. Now add to the fact that you don't know all the states of the system and it becomes very hard to know quantum mechanics with any degree of absolute knowledge - one oxygen atom may behave differently than another under the same conditions. And it does throw into question some of the basic assumptions we make about things. Because if two oxygen atoms can behave differently in quantum mechanics, yet function the same in classical mechanics, then whether they are the same or not depends on how you look at or use them. And the same goes for relativity, where classical mechanics works when Special Relativity becomes negligible, but doesn't apply when dealing with speeds close to the speed of light. And it throws some of the basic assumptions that there is an absolute reality into question.

    The article doesn't mention this specifically, but it does talk about this somewhat haphazardly and indirectly, I think assuming the reader is already aware of what the writer is saying. It's not a very good article, but there is an argument for questioning the idea of an absolute reality.
    I agree that we should question the existence of reality, as there are no strong reasons to believe it exists. The only answer people ever seem to give is: "It must exist because it's OBVIOUS it exists. Look at it!"

  5. #55
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Feminists mistrust science because too many straight white men are scientists, and clearly, that must mean that science will be biased against women?

    What they don't understand is that science is not a political ideology inspired by ovarian floods of emotion, like feminism.

    Whoever wrote that article needs to take a course on avoiding nominalisations in science communication, as well. Oh my fucking god.

  6. #56
    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
    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.
    i don't know if that's true because i only read a few lines before writing it off, but your idea makes more sense.

    also, why are "left-wing bias" and "left-leaning" in quotation marks? is there any dispute that the scientific community and almost all of its media has devolved into a liberal puppet?
    we fukin won boys

  7. #57
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    I agree that we should question the existence of reality, as there are no strong reasons to believe it exists. The only answer people ever seem to give is: "It must exist because it's OBVIOUS it exists. Look at it!"
    Try shooting yourself, then.

  8. #58
    Senior Member Amalie Muller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Try shooting yourself, then.
    I don't think that would help. If anything, that would kind of prove my point. Where do you go when you die, once the illusion ends?

  9. #59
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amalie Muller View Post
    I don't think that would help. If anything, that would kind of prove my point. Where do you go when you die, once the illusion ends?
    Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

    It is irrational to view death with either hope or fear.

  10. #60
    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
    I don't think that would help. If anything, that would kind of prove my point. Where do you go when you die, once the illusion ends?
    bro how do you even know it's an illusion though
    we fukin won boys

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