From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Wed Apr 20 2005 - 19:26:18 BST
Hi Ian,
> FWIW, I think we have two main topics circulating ...
OK
> (1) Belief vs faith - what makes a good one. What makes what is
> believed "more true". My battleground here is "quality of
> explanation".
Fine, but I want to explore what the criteria being employed are. I'm very
comfortable with explanation being the angle from which to explore the
question, though. Would you say you're broadly pragmatic on this front? If
so we'd probably get to a place of major agreement pretty quickly.
> (2) When talking about scientific method (but not science) as part of
> "evidence" in MoQ circles, we keep confusing the concepts of
> "empiricism" and "pre-intellectual experience".
Yeah, there's a whole nest of problems with that. I'd be happy to leave that
angle be for the time being.
> PS, your obligatory Einstein quote ... note he is delineating
> "positive" knowledge from "fantasy" (inspiration / intuition / etc.),
> both are part of the knowledge of the physics, and its explanation of
> the world.
Why 'obligatory'? But more importantly, can you spell out what you mean by
fantasy being part of the knowledge of physics? (Are you meaning the sort of
thing that RMP talks about in ZMM?)
Cheers
Sam
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 : Wed Apr 20 2005 - 20:59:03 BST