And he was readable Nom!

On 27 Nov, 16:34, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>  Locke
> left room for something more speculative than the empirical. / Archytas
>
> Smart fellow, that Locke....
> - show quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 26, 2012 7:31:09 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote:
>
> > I don't go with Craig on the 'answer' - but we don't know what matter
> > or energy is - we construct notions of such in the present including
> > the notion some 'stuff' is older than us.  Whitehead's 'occasions of
> > experience' perhaps.
> > We sidestep a lot of ontology with method.  If you waft a bit of lead
> > carbonate in a test tube in a Bunsen flame for a while it will turn
> > yellow. That is, on Earth in normal lab conditions.  You could check
> > this out if arsed.  A blind man would need a sighter he could trust.
> > If I draw two line on a flip chart, one slightly shorter than the
> > other and get a collaborator to point to the short one and say it is
> > the longest - most will follow the lie and point to the wrong one.  A
> > ruler becomes the arbiter.  Much of science is about keeping cheating
> > slackers and dumb sheep behaviour out.  Particles are just accounting
> > devices and theories accounting systems.  Science likes to mark to
> > what it posits as reality - unlike banks.  What that reality is - fuck
> > knows - but just hold the top of this Leiden Jar Nom - the shock will
> > only be nominal (or Nominal's?).  Make me a radio based on some goon's
> > ideas about health giving crystals - or try Wireless World (I was once
> > an addict).  Tropical fish realism works - but this doesn't negate
> > what Craig has to say and neither does it not working for me.  Locke
> > left room for something more speculative than the empirical.
>
> > On 26 Nov, 18:49, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The way that it makes sense to me is that energy is only the experience
> > of
> > > matter interacting with matter, and matter is only experience divorced
> > from
> > > any given participant. To you, your life is images, feelings, thoughts.
> > To
> > > me is it a body or brain - materials having an effect on other materials
> > in
> > > the world.
>
> > > Our idea of energy and information are the two greatest obstacles to our
> > > understanding. We have objectified them as existential
> > pseudo-substances,
> > > but I think that the reality is that energy and information are nothing
> > but
> > > arbitrarily depersonalized sensory-motor experience. Information is
> > sensory
> > > input, energy is motor output, each of which define and constrain each
> > > other.. Period.
>
> > > On Monday, November 26, 2012 1:36:54 PM UTC-5, nominal9 wrote:
>
> > > > I have a "teasing" question for the both of you....Socrates and
> > > > Archytas....are Energy and Matter (interchangeable and mutable as they
> > may
> > > > be)... both "physical"... or are they just "conceptual"....same
> > question
> > > > put differently ... are Energy and Matter an  "idea" or are they an
> > actual
> > > > "real" thing?....Sometimes I think "scientists" get lost in their
> > > > "abstractions"..... of formulas and mathematics...theories and
> > > > hypotheses....Me... I think that Energy and Matter are Objective,
> > actually
> > > > "there" and "real"....but I'm just a lowly lay-person....
>
> > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012 11:16:00 AM UTC-4,
> > socr...@bezeqint.netwrote:
>
> > > >> Our Modern Scientific Philosophy.
> > > >> =.
> > > >> The simplest atom hydrogen consists of electron and proton.
> > > >> Question.
> > > >> Where did electron and proton come from?
> > > >> Answer.
> > > >> Electron and proton came from big bang.
> > > >> Question.
> > > >>  Where the did big bang come from?
> > > >> Answer.
> > > >> The big bang was created when all electrons and protons
> > > >> and all another particles were pressed into a singular point.
> > > >> ==..
> > > >> If you don’t believe in such philosophy – you are an ignorant man.
> > > >> =.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to