Re: virus: RE: Hegel's Virus

Tim Rhodes (
Thu, 1 May 1997 12:01:45 -0700 (PDT)

On 30 Apr 1997, D. H. Rosdeitcher wrote:

> In objectivism there can be no ultimate truth, just improving (or making more
> useful) models of reality, since we have limited knowledge in an infinite
> universe.

I had yet to hear this about objectivism. With so much talk about how
objectivism the *best* way to comnstruct the models, I don't think I ever
heard you or Tad say that they were inherantly limited and inacurate
models like all models are.

But then, it was probably a fault of my understanding. I must have missed
that point in the past.

> It appears that memetics got influenced by a line of thinkers, known
> sometimes as "nominalists", who say the same thing. However, while
> objectivists focus on objective reality itself, the nominalists focus on
> subjective notions of reality.

Cool, a new title: Prof. Tim the raving Nominalist.

> The senses differ in everyone and they can be deceptive. But, the "next
> layer", related to the mind, puts together the bigger picture of what
> the senses communicate and can construct useful or reality approximating
> models, even if the sense data has inaccuracies.

This is a little hard for me to follow. Are you saying that the "next
layer" (as you call it) puts together models that can approximate reality
even if the "sense" data is sketchy or in error?

> This first layer of the
> senses has primacy over the second layer of consciousness, since the
> perceptions come first, then concepts follow.

Again, I'm not sure I follow. The mind can cover for the inaccuracies of
the senses, but the senses have primacy over the mind? This isn't clear
to me.

-Prof. Tim