Re: MD Truth and Understanding and Knowledge

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2004 - 14:26:51 GMT

  • Next message: Matt poot: "Re: MD Do we all need philosophy?"

    Hi David M,

    Paul Turner has the best understanding of truth that I know:

    "Truth is the static aesthetic of intellectual harmony."

    That's hard to beat for "economy of explanation."

    Regards,
    Platt

    > Hi all
    >
    > I would like to put forward a position
    > on truth to see who agrees/disagrees.
    >
    > I think we can take truth in a very simple way.
    > There is only one world, one truth. Is there a cat
    > behind the wall? Answer: yes or not. Does gravity
    > pull on bodies according to distance in an inverse
    > square law? Answer: yes or no. Which hole did the
    > electron go through? -Well, neither actually, so there
    > is something wrong with the question.
    >
    > Now to have any understanding/knowledge of the truth
    > requires an appropriate language applied to patterns
    > that we suspect operate in certain repeating ways.
    > Hence, all knowledge is a human creation, therefore it
    > is utterly fallible, and subject to all the epistemological problems
    > the post modernists suggests. However, the truth remains.
    > We can test our knowledge against nature, even though nature
    > is a very elusive conversational partner. She drives us mad.
    > We cannot just ask is there a cat behind the wall?
    > She does not answer that question. We can put some milk
    > behind the wall and nature will give us an empty saucer back.
    > We might be on to something. We send some mice in and they
    > rarely make it back again, etc. We build up theories of entities
    > (cats) and their behaviour under different controlled conditions.
    > We name things, we describe patterns, and on we go. It can go very
    > badly wrong, but we make overall progress. After a while we revise
    > things and discoveer curious entities, maybe a cat-fish that can also swim.
    > And an entity is only a set of patterns under certain conditions, a human
    > being is a certain way of looking at the patterns of a particular
    > configuration of molecules, and that again as patterns of atoms, or going
    > the other way certain organic material becomes a human and then gets fed
    > back to bacteria and round the food chain pattern it goes. All different
    > levels of patterns, all exhibiting the most amazing fullness of potential,
    > from quantum particles to become atoms, to become suns, to become
    > molecules, to become seas, to become plants, to become food, to become
    > animals, to become a horse and cart, to become human, to become writing, to
    > become music, to become emotions, etc etc ...
    >
    > Agree/disagree?
    >
    > regards
    > David M
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Tue Feb 10 2004 - 14:57:41 GMT