Brent wrote:
> If you know the domain of your model there won't be any impact from
beyond. Of course the domain is uncertain at the edges - but just because
there is Grey doesn't mean there is no black and white.<
Our views (I did not press: definition) of a "model' differs. Since I
consider the totality as interrelated and interactive and the 'model' a
topical cut as the object of our observation (c.f.: sciences) those
boundaries we surround our (my) models are 'cutting off' the rest of the
world. With all the influence it may have on events BENEATH those (selected)
boundaries.
I am not talking about a grey area.
*
> Should we then resort mystical thinking or armchair philosophizing or
theological revelation?<
I do not call your wording an argumentation (style?) ad hominem,
if you know no better variant, you can refer to any one that comes to your
mind. Finally:
> Can you do some other kind of thinking?<
The answer is: YES, for one there are things to which I respond
"I dunno" but try to think in new ways which does not mean that I also
completed it.
To know about something that is not perfect does not imply the obligation to
'perfect it' at the same time. It takes lots of work.
Without necessarily resorting to mystics or (religious) theology.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Meeker" <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology'
>
> jamikes.domain.name.hidden wrote:
> > Stathis:
> > would you condone to include in your (appreciated) post below the words
at
> > the * I plant into your text?
> > The words: "in the (scientific?) belief system we have TODAY about our
> > interpretation of whatever epistemically we so far learned about the
> > 'world'."
> > That would underline your subsequent sentence - if you kindly stop
> > denigrating the term 'metaphysics' - a pejoration of the same 'carried
away'
> > physicists.
> >
> > The word 'prediction' also sends the chill alongside my spine: how can a
> > model based on a model predict events subject to impact from 'beyond
model'
> > changes?
>
> If you know the domain of your model there won't be any impact from
beyond. Of
> course the domain is uncertain at the edges - but just because there is
grey doesn't
> mean there is no black and white.
>
> > The many results of science-technology should not lead us into a
generalized
> > acceptance of the model-based thinking.
>
> Should we then resort mystical thinking or armchair philosophizing or
theological
> revelation?
>
> >This list is a good example.
>
> Can you do some other kind of thinking?
>
> Brent Meeker
>
>
> >
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.6/427 - Release Date: 08/24/06
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Aug 25 2006 - 11:51:37 PDT