In a message dated 2/12/99 3:27:46 PM Central Standard Time, proftim@speakeasy.org writes:
<< What I see is: A system that is exhibiting deterministic chaos. And
directed input into that system for the purpose of perturbing it into a
greater degree of balance.
What do you see? >>
Yes, I have read the Principia Cybernetica site on occasion.
On this faith thing:
I see some people making sense, and other people trying to obfuscate and evade sensibility.
If everybody has faith, then "faith" is a pretty meaningless word. As it is ordinarily used in reality by people actually claiming to have faith, it is not a thing that I can see everybody and every process involving. If faith is everything, then it may as well be nothing. But there are important distinctions to made between faith, trust, hope.
If I were to say that "I believe in God only until I have reasons not to" that is not faith. Faith means not holding a representation (or belief) in principle open to rational criticism. It does not mean belief without evidence. If that were the case, I could say "I believe in God only until I have evidence against God." That is not faith. Look to Job, the sine qua non of faith, and you see that faith is not faith unless you are willing to believe in contradiction to the evidence. That do that requires that you not hold the article of faith in principle open to rational criticism in the first place.
I am a pancritical rationalist. Everything is principle is open to rational criticism, even for many that haven't yet discovered the phrase "pancritical rationalist". If you have no faith, then you may be one of those too. Having faith, is antitheitical to being a pancritical (or non-justificational) rationalist. But I certainly can have lots of that hope and trust stuff. That is not faith.
I can trust somebody until I have reasons not to. I can even believe something in the absence of evidence, but I cannot believe something in contradiction to reason and evidence. Scientists do not have faith in the scientific process, but they have plenty of good reasons to trust it.
Kogawara -
Non-Justificational Rationalism</A>
http://www.law.mita.keio.ac.jp/~sehagi/kogawara3.html
-Jake