From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sun Aug 29 2004 - 09:27:38 BST
Tricky one this Platt - I don't have all the answers ..
I think I've already said,
I have no argument with "consistency with experience",
and only a minor caveat with "economy of explanation".
Better (MoQ-based) tests than cold scientific logic ?
How about ...
Consideration of which (MoQ) layers the current issue relates,
relationships between the layers and the motivations of the actors involved.
Gut feel, common sense, the opinion of someone you "trust".
A good story, a good joke / aphorism / analogy / metaphor, sleep on it
perhaps ...
A long hard think on a lonely mountaintop, after a long hard climb in which
to forget about cultural pre-conceptions ?
Or the Joni Mitchell Method - "I've looked at clouds from both sides now"
Or - my personal favourite - staring in wonder at a strong tidal flow of
water for a few hours.
All sounds a bit "Zen Enlightenment" that ?
What a surprise, given I'm no Buddhist, nor any kind of mystic.
Just "feels" right. If it (genuinely) feels good do it.
Read Russo here
http://www.psybertron.org/2004_08_01_archive.html#109333984212512031
In short, I dunno, you tell me.
That's why I'm on this board - to learn.
All I'm damn sure of is that the answer is rarely cold-scientific
proximate-cause-effect logic.
Careful with that razor, Occam !
Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>; <owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: MD Fox News and Logical Analysis
> Ian:
>
> Ian wrote:
> > Human Scale Issues ? How about the ones debated interminably on here.
> > War & Peace, Good and Evil, Values, responsibilities at Abu Graib, you
get
> > the idea.
> >
> > Anyone using an argument like,
> > Saddam did this, and so-and-so is true, therefore the right answer is
XXX -
> > is a numbskull, as we discover over and over again. Or more precisely is
a
> > political animal hiding from blame behind the rhetoric of "logic".
> >
> > Alternatives ? How about MoQ ?
>
> Ian previously:
> > > > (2) I very carefully did not "abandon logic".
> > > > It has its place. What I said was
> > > > "stop applying only simple, (classical, scientific) logic
> > > > to complex, multi-level, human-scale issues"
> > > >
> > > > Consistency and agreement with experience ?
> > > > OK, but I'd use better tests than simple logic (in such cases).
>
> Platt previously:
> > > What "better tests" would you suggest in dealing with "complex, multi-
> > > level, human-scale issues?"
>
> You suggest using the MOQ as tests. OK. But please enlighten me as to what
> those tests might be. How would they be different than Pirsig's tests of
> truth -- "logical consistency, agreement with experience, and economy of
> explanation."
>
> Thanks.
> Platt
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 29 2004 - 09:52:05 BST