> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of Platt Holden
> Sent: Tuesday, 28 November 2000 4:31
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: RE: MD Inconsistency, Incompleteness
>
>
> Hi Chris:
>
<snip>
> > What makes people sure about the instruments comes down to faith, where
> > there is no range, there is an absolute, fundamental sense of
> 'right' -- but
> > this can be delusion!
>
> I take it that your answer is "Yes." Ultimately, regardless of what
> method of analysis we use or what instruments we employ to
> determine "the truth," incompleteness and uncertainty are our lot
> in life.
Well .. sort of! The neurological/psychological evidence point to:
'Truth' in an objective sense, as an absolute, a 'thing', is linked to an
act of faith. Neurologically 'truth' can be linked to an abstraction of the
feeling of 'correct' when our reptilian/amphebian ancestors developed
waypoint mapping techniques to mark territory. This 'truth' stems from the
concept of ownership. There is a feeling associated with this that is
usually expressed in the left hemisphere of the brain and is tied to syntax
processing in language.
The waypoint mapping processes have been documented in rats running mazes
and London taxidrivers learning 'the knowledge'. They all use waypoint
techniques which favour 'tree X, turn right go three hundred meters to bush
Y etc etc'. (together with 'marking' these points -- dont think the London
taxi drivers would do this other then perhaps have a drink at the pub used
as a waypoint!)
When you move from 'absolute' truth where there is no awareness/recognition
of negation you shift into recognition of doubt and so ... uncertainty.
Science cannot work with absolute faith officially but the way algorithms
and formulas are used you would think that Science was a Religion :-)
Think of truth as manifest in stimulus/response behaviour, like a samurai
with his sword, they are 'blended', as 'one' and all response is 'precise'
and 'right'. An error leads to death or if you are lucky you get away with
some injury. Here you move into stimulus/considered_response, feeback on the
cause of the injury etc is used to re-assess and so refine the skills and in
so doing reconfirm one's faith in oneself ready for the next
stimulus/response exercise -- you learn from feedback and then 'stop'
thinking.. make the learning into a habit... react with no thought, react
precisely :-) Thus education and feedback act to give more choices in
response to genetically determined GENERAL behaviours.
This allows you to integrate well with any specific context as well as
general contexts and those that intergrate well are more often seen as
having 'quality' in their interactions with reality.
Whilst you are in considered_response mode you have doubts, uncertainty...
In modern times it is Science that helps with the feedback process, the
refinement of skills to include 'plug-ins', modules to aid you in your
'battles' but no matter how 'precise' these are, no matter how 'confident'
you are the final test is an act of faith, in yourself, your culture, your
species ...
>Your explanation appears to support my long-held
> contention that philosophy is basically a search for assumptions
> (often hidden) which uphold a point of view. Ayn Rand's oft-
> repeated dictum, "Check your premises," seems apropos here
> except she omitted the key premise that premises, including her
> own, are faith-based.
>
right :-) it is the feedback that 'solidifies' the faith to the extant of it
becoming blind faith at times :-)
It is interesting that Pirsig at the end of Lila states that:
"Good is a noun....the ultimate Quality isn't a noun or adjective or
anything definable, but if you had to reduce the whole Metaphysics of
Quality to a single sentence, that would be it" p476
>From neurological/psychological studies that part of the brain linked to
object emphasis (the ONE)is also linked to positive/neutral emotions. It is
relationships that are tied to negation in that relationships act to
constrain (this can act as a form of exageration, of enhancement but any
high/low distinction is in itself a form of constraint). That part of the
brain linked more to relational processes is also part linked to depression
in that that part of the brain deals with linkage BETWEEN things. Object
thinking is more self-contained and can touch on psychosis where psychosis
reveals anti-SOCIAL behaviour.
Fundamentalist faiths are also 'ONE' biased, something Pirsig mentions in
Lila re the link of religion to psychosis...
In the above quote re 'Good' he touches on the 50/50 split, where our
neurology identifies objects and relationships but does not identify what IS
an object/relationship; it picks one and feedback validates the choice over
time. Pirsig's choice correlated with feelings of 'good' being positive and
intuitively linked to object thinking; to a preference for foreground over
background, text over context. However at the same time he recognises that
we go beyond this where we entangle good/bad etc into BOTH/AND states --
potentials where a shared state reflects a superposition of these feelings
and context 'collapses' the state into an either/or, local, assessment.
>From a very primitive perspective the baby is a 'pure' form, all positive
with strong positive drives. It is placed in a context and that context acts
to constrain the 'manic' drive of the child; it works as a negative but also
a transformer, refining stimulus/response, ALL or nothing behaviour, with
feedback...
best,
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:51 BST