RE: MD The Intellectual Level

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Jul 27 2003 - 20:34:23 BST

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD The Intellectual Level"

    Ian:

    I honestly don't know what you're talking about. I only asked you to explain
    "bootstrapping". As far as I can tell, you haven't said a word about it.
    What kind of game are you playing? Maybe I should take non-answers like this
    to mean that you don't know the meaning of the terms you've employed. Maybe
    I should just assume that such jargon is used by posers hell bent on
    perpetrating some kind of intellectual fraud? Maybe I should conclude that
    posers evade questions about this jargon because any scrutiny at all would
    expose the lie? No, that would be going too far. But I am beginning to have
    certain suspicions along that line...

    Please. Restore my faith in humanity. Explain "bootstrapping" in ordinary
    language. I don't want to hear about Plato or the nature of bureaucracy,
    least of all from Matt or from 1872. I just asked about "bootstrapping".

    Thanks,
    dmb

    Ian answered:
    I did get your drift .. (hence my "I don't do long mails" wink)
    Take this as an IOU for a full answer (cos I'm short of time - as usual)

    An observation though

    I actually don't buy the "we must define and agree our terms before we can
    have a valid (but long) dialectical argument" bit.
    That is actually the Catch-22 from which I wish to free us.
    (And incidentally the one from which I thought the pragmatist Pirsig had
    freed us.)

    I personally believe in many short exchanges where we each share our own
    half-meanings, until concensus is discovered.
    One man's "valuable shortcut" is another man's "jargon" until this happens.

    At the risk of shooting mysef in the foot - another corollary of than d*mned
    Catch-22 - my catchphrase in my current day job, when people glibly say "a
    picture is worth a thousand words" is "why use one (dead) word when an
    (active) sentence will do (better)"

    But I'll probably have to explain that too ;-)

    This from Matt's Fallen Priest
    [Quote] The Platonic tradition argues that for intellectual discourse to
    occur, we must agree on terms and then argue various positions and platforms
    according to these terms. At the end of an engagement, some sort of
    consensus will have occurred (or not) given the singular use of terms and
    the rigorousness and thoroughness of argumentation.
    ....
    Dynamic Quality is the new metaphor over the horizon, it's the invention of
    a new context that helps us see the low Quality of our old context. Dynamic
    Quality is not absolute, objective Truth. That would be naming it. That
    would be making the same mistake that Plato made, which may have been a good
    idea at the time, but one we now need to overcome.[Unquote]

    This via Doug's Quantonics
    [Quote] Walter Bagehot in 1872 "The whole history of civilisation is strewn
    with creeds and institutions which were invaluable at first, and deadly
    afterwards. A is sure to think that its duty is to augment
    official power, official business, or official members, rather than to leave
    free the energies of mankind; it overdoes the quantity of government, as
    well as impairs its quality. The truth is, that a skilled bureaucracy . . .
    is, though it boasts of an appearance of science, quite inconsistent with
    the true principles of the art of business." [Unquote]

    Bye for now
    Ian

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
    [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of David Buchanan
    Sent: 27 July 2003 01:28
    To: 'moq_discuss@moq.org'
    Subject: RE: MD The Intellectual Level

    Ian and all:

    dmb asked:
    Bootstrapping? Please tell me exactly what you mean. No post is too long. I
    promise to read every word of your explanation.

    Ian answered:
    In a model which is self-consistent but circular, fixing one variable
    provides a valid population for the rest, but of course it is one of many
    possible valid populations unless your fixed variable is fixed in some
    absolute sense independant of the model.

    dmb says:
    Hmmm. How about an explanation that excludes esoteric phrases like "valid
    population" and "fixed variable", because I really don't know what they
    mean. While such language is a valuable shortcut for some, for others it is
    only an obstacle. My suggestion that explanation would be too long was
    really a request that you please take the time express these concepts in
    normal language. Otherwise it makes no sense to me and I'd really like to
    know what you mean. I'd also like to see if you can do it. (I'm skeptical.
    The pragmatists around here...)

    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

    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 Jul 27 2003 - 20:35:29 BST