--------------2781446B794B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hey Virusites,
A visitor to C-Realm.com wrote the following:
A clever if confusing site. The art work in the comics was quite good.
However I suspect I'm your intellectual opposite. You see I think the
big picture is true. I know quite a bit about both physics and
philosophy and have found both of them quite useful in forming the big
picture that I have. The "meme" that I live by is A=A. All things are
what they are and contradictions cannot exist. It all follows from that.
That is the "Big Picture".
To which I responded:
>
> Hi Nathaniel,
>
> thanks for taking a look at the page and for sending me your honest
> response. I think A=A at time T, but that A is usually a label for a
> catagory of entities, events, or processes that is heavily dependent on
> cultural (particularly linguistic) context and rarely univocal. I don't
> think that numbers are priviledged in this respect. Quantification does
> not equal objective measurement. Still, I respect your position and I
> wish you the best.
>
> Take care. -KMO
>
Nathaniel responded with:
You claim that quantification is not objective measurement. I
disagree. An example is the speed of light. I've done the experiment
myself and got the same result as anybody else would get. It does not
depend on your culture, it does not depend on the time when you measure
it. It is a universal constant that is just as true and unchanging as
2+2=4. Some folks point to the theory of Realitivity and say Ah Ha! Time
and space are not fixed! What they fail to notice however is a better
label for the theory would be "The theory of absolute physical law"
since everything in the theory is based on the speed of light in a
vacuum is the same ALWAYS.
If you need more proof of the objective nature of the universe, look
no further than the screen you are looking at. It's not there by chance.
It exists because a long line of people figured out the necessary
objective laws of nature that were out there (and have ALWAYS been out
there). If it was to break on you, you would'nt go to just anybody to
fix it. No you'd go to someone who you believed knew the natural laws
that make it work! The objective test is a simple one too, independent
of time or place or culture or some linguistic context .The test is: Did
it get fixed? With all the marvelous technological achievments in the
world today how can one doubt the validity of the objective view of
nature?
To which I can only say:
Hello again,
This is an old debate. I've argued both sides at one time or another.
It's a rewarding debate, but a time-consuming one when conducted via
email. Tempting as it is, I don't have the time to do it justice these
days. I've forwarded your posts to the Church of the Virus disscussion
list. I expect that several of the regular participants will be happy
to defend the position that the scientific model is a useful one but
that it has its limitations and blind spots. If this is something about
which you feel strongly, as it certainly seems to be judging from your
most recent message, I think you would find the CoV discussion list both
engaging and rewarding. You can access the CoV through C-Realm.
Take care.
-KMO
--------------2781446B794B
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Received: by zephyr.amazon.com id GAA02263; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
by amazon.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA21863
for <kmo@amazon.com>; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.lgcy.com(208.23.31.32) by fortaleza.amazon.com via smap (V2.0beta)
id xma021669; Sat, 6 Sep 97 06:26:46 -0700
Received: from async73.lgcy.com (async73.lgcy.com [207.14.217.73]) by mail.lgcy.com (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id ja073563 for <kmo@amazon.com>; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:26:13 -0600
Message-ID: <341158E6.598@lgcy.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 07:21:42 -0600
From: Nathaniel Hall <natehall@lgcy.com>
Reply-To: natehall@lgcy.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: KMO <kmo@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: memes at the meme site
References: <340BA237.BDC8888@lgcy.com> <34103E67.7DE1@amazon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
KMO wrote:
>
> Hi Nathaniel,
>
> thanks for taking a look at the page and for sending me your honest
> response. I think A=A at time T, but that A is usually a label for a
> catagory of entities, events, or processes that is heavily dependent on
> cultural (particularly linguistic) context and rarely univocal. I don't
> think that numbers are priviledged in this respect. Quantification does
> not equal objective measurement. Still, I respect your position and I
> wish you the best.
>
> Take care. -KMO
>
You claim that quantification is not objective measurement. I
disagree. An example is the speed of light. I've done the experiment
myself and got the same result as anybody else would get. It does not
depend on your culture, it does not depend on the time when you measure
it. It is a universal constant that is just as true and unchanging as
2+2=4. Some folks point to the theory of Realitivity and say Ah Ha! Time
and space are not fixed! What they fail to notice however is a better
label for the theory would be "The theory of absolute physical law"
since everything in the theory is based on the speed of light in a
vacuum is the same ALWAYS.
If you need more proof of the objective nature of the universe, look
no further than the screen you are looking at. It's not there by chance.
It exists because a long line of people figured out the necessary
objective laws of nature that were out there (and have ALWAYS been out
there). If it was to break on you, you would'nt go to just anybody to
fix it. No you'd go to someone who you believed knew the natural laws
that make it work! The objective test is a simple one too, independent
of time or place or culture or some linguistic context .The test is: Did
it get fixed? With all the marvelous technological achievments in the
world today how can one doubt the validity of the objective view of
nature?
--------------2781446B794B--