Re: [pcp-discuss:] Re: Fwd: Comments on _One Half Of A Manifesto_ by Jaron Lanier

From: steve (
Date: Tue Nov 14 2000 - 17:14:03 GMT

  • Next message: Norman K. McPhail: "Re: [pcp-discuss:] Re: Fwd: Comments on _One Half Of A Manifesto_ by Jaron Lanier"

    > I think that most philosophers agree that the philosophy of science is a
    > part of philosophy. But wouldn't they also say that the whole of
    > philosophy goes well beyond the realms of science?
    > NKM
    > Menno RUBINGH wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Philosophy"s ". . .ultimate *goal* is
    > > practical, and firmly embedded in down-to-earth, practical, pragmatic,
    > > technology."

    I don't see how the two can be separated.
    Science is "natural philosophy" which apprehends
    the entire natural world. As science (linguistics,
    cognitive science, etc) make inroads into a
    science of language and understanding and
    consciousness, the line is blurred again, some
    more, forever.

    Godel's incompleteness theorem would seem
    to typify the interlockedness of the two.

    Meanwhile, we all have our own personal
    relationship to science and the mystery
    that comes with it. For only a very few
    does science seem to evaporate the mystery,
    for most, I contend, it merely adds beauty
    and complexity to the simple mysteries
    such as existence, duality of form and
    function, form and substance.

    I do not see how, until we become machines
    or Vulcans, that one can exclude the other.
    And even then, we suspect both machines
    and Vulcans of being capable of apprehending
    beauty, art, philosophy and the rest of us
    of accepting beauty, art and philosophy as
    not excluding science.

    Steve Smith
    TSA-5 LANL

    Posting to from steve <>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 14 2000 - 17:25:23 GMT