Menno
seems to be a badly needed breath of fresh air for Principia.
WEin Principia have some shared understandings of complex
coupled generative systems,
which are woefully lacking in the conduct of the World's affairs.
There are now also wonderfull and practically useful technics
for marshalling such understandings:
Lowry's Needles <http://www.ultranet.com/~eslowry/>,
Jaworski's j-Maps <http://www.gen-strategies.com/>,
High Performance Systems' Stella <http://www.hps-inc.com>,
and Sentences <http://www.lazysoft.com>
Perhaps it is time to look at the project of unifying science again with
the various current tools, which were undreamed of
by the Chicago group (Otto Neurath, Kuhn et al.)
Gary Boyd
At 02:00 21/11/2000 +0100, you wrote:
> Hi John & others !
>
> I've had a look at
>
> http://www.nexial.org/BMI/ISSS2000/ISSS_2000_Kineman_e.html
>
> and to my sorrow I am unable to read it without feeling annoyed by it,
> I'm sorry. I have a feeling that what the text deals with I'd
> pragmatically better leave to people who like these things better than I
> do, and that meanwhile I'd better get on with the things on which I
> think I *can* think and create meaningfully. To each person his/her own
> fields of exploration.
>
> *If* there is in the text anything that points towards making PRACTICAL
> use of these insights (I mean: to create new technology), then please
> make these things more clear to me. I have not found any of this in the
> text; it seems to me that ALL of the text is rather exclusively
> theoretical, even extravagantly so -- in my eyes (I'm sorry) it even
> borders on the mystical, e.g. this :
>
> > We could also, of course, speculate on the broader humanistic and
> > religious aspects of the view presented. It provides many openings
> > for traditional and non-traditional spiritual thought, especially
> > Eastern metaphysics. It suggests the possibility of abstract
> > universes, eternal time, and light singularities in a domain that is
> > removed from the material world of observation. In an abstract
> > realm, where many worlds are possible, many beliefs are also
> > possible. Since the model is based on a causal relationship between
> > these domains, beliefs themselves are significant. Can we not see
> > the physical results of specific beliefs in the world today? Such
> > thoughts were, in the recent past, dismissed from science using the
> > assertion that all thoughts come directly from the world, and
> > therefore can be ignored in its causal explanation. The view here
> > says they do not, although there is clearly the means for mutual
> > influence. While the potential for spiritual interpretation may be
> > bothersome to some, the habit of scientific materialism has been
> > bothersome for others. In the quest for truth one should not feel
> > impoverished if it is found that different paths can begin with the
> > same concept of reality.
>
> I'm again sorry, but I am unable to interpret this as almost pure
> religion. You seem to want to base models/science/philosophy/technology
> on ''mystical'' things -- where I try to do the reverse: I am rather
> intent on explaining everything that might *seem* mystical from
> mechanical explanations. I believe strongly in my axiom/assumption that
> everything is mechanical, you seem to beleive quite strongly in your
> assumption that basically everything can not be mechanical.
>
> Everyone his/her own tastes. IMO it's useless to discuss with people
> whose opinions are TOO MUCH fundamentally different -- in such cases,
> I think that e.g. tolerant coexistence might be more (mutually) useful.
>
>---
> Best regards, Menno (rubingh@delftnet.nl)
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Ir. Menno Rubingh,
> Scientific programmer, Software designer, & Software documentation writer
>Doelenstraat 62, 2611 NV Delft, Netherlands
>phone +31 15 2146915 (answering machine backup)
>email rubingh@delftnet.nl
>http://www.rubinghscience.org/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>========================================
>Posting to pcp-discuss@lanl.gov from "Menno RUBINGH" <rubingh@delftnet.nl>
Professor Gary Boyd, Education (Educational Technology Graduate Programme)
Concordia University,
1455 DeMaisonneuve West, Montreal, Quebec Canada H3G 1M8.
<boydg@vax2.concordia.ca> tel.(514)848-3459, fax(514)848-4520.
homepage <http://alcor.concordia.ca/~boydg/ >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Toward Eco-CO-cultural conviviality, through
participative cybersystemic modelling, and
Grace & grudge networking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================
Posting to pcp-discuss@lanl.gov from "PRof. Gary Boyd" <boydg@vax2.concordia.ca>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 21 2000 - 18:03:41 GMT