Being paranoid doesn't mean no one is following you with an ice-pick Nom. Whitehead advocated adventures with ideas. This gets tough in knowledge justification. Ad hom is acceptable in some argument - the eristic version (summary in Stanford somewhere). The spreadsheet is something of an application of process philosophy for me - trying to link events in a network - sadly one can also trash the things as yet another pathetic application of numbers to human affairs - and of course 'they' attach numbers to what suits them leaving much that is really important as an 'externality'.
On Jan 13, 8:13 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > We are OK Archytas..... > Sorry for the "classist" charge... I didn't believe it for a minute...My > game was soccer if I hadn't told you before... HAR, don't swipe my HAR.... > Process Philosophy... I did some looking into Mr. Whitehead... more > in-depth than the summary below...http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/ > The fellow got into some some odd permutations.... extending > "psychological" modes of analysis and workings into the physical world... > as for his contribution to the "systems theory" part... His notions of > extension of "events" in time and space seems practical and useful > enough.... But the notion of some sort of transmission of "some > "essential-as -in - universal" thing" from one existent to another > completely different existent by non-physical and non-communicative means > (I forget now what W. termed it)... that was somewhat sci-fi. I'll leave > it to (and for) you to evaluate the merits of his (W.'s) own and others' > advancements in "process or system theory"... just try to maintain a tie or > relation to actual physical "things" (RES), with that system stuff, to keep > me happy....make it "empirically" proveable and applicable, OK? Question > for you.... epistemologically, what would you call Whitehead?... > > "Your may not be as 'smart' as me Nom - no cock length test meant (you do > too much > of that sometimes)" > Archytas.... I've known you on and off for years....I like you, respect > you, all of that.... please take a cue... My material... thematic dialectic > "stuff", is not half bad (at all)... it has been around for quite a while > and has been picked over and plagiarized piecemeal by quite a few "greater" > intellects than you might think....but then, you'll just say I'm > paranoid.... HAR.... > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile > Is this the Jimmy Savile you meant? Hadn't heard of him....Penn State > University had a similar situation with a (US) football assistant coach... > Jerry Sandusky... you may have > heard.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_State_child_sex_abuse_scandal > Sorry states of affairs...speaks ill of institutions, maybe more so than > the men themselves.... > Closer to my "home"... there has been the Sandy Hook > shootinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting > Too fresh to comment on for me.... so I won't.... > > Sorry to end on a tragic note... next post I'll try to go another route.... > Stephen hasn't written for a bit...maybe he'll drop by ... > Socratus, also... mind body dualism... I wonder what kind or relation of > dualism he favors? > > > > > > > > On Friday, January 11, 2013 9:10:42 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > HAR indeed mate - we should probably be sharing the tequila I'm > > demolishing (family crap). I'd have been shooting your way against > > King George. Appreciate what you say here, but you have me wrong! > > Too many people take argument the wrong way - hence we lose Chaz > > because people can't take him and think he insults them - the guy is > > sweet. No - my view on university is that everyone should have access > > - but we'd change the nature of the places to allow that. > > Deconstruction as an academic genre is totally hapless. The idea of > > me as a supporter of the elite is so fatuous I love it! HAR! > > Sam Carena posted a vid in here ages ago with a bunch of climate > > scientists doing a 'motherfucker rap' - wish I had the talent to come > > up with one of the unlikely scenario of me as 'keeper of the Queen's > > stool'. > > Nah! Process philosophy gives us the chance to change the 'bricks' - > > in essence it's speculative. I don't think you and I are arsed > > whether nominalism is better than tropical fish realism and would both > > go out of our way to help the old dear across the road. Universities > > claim to be democratic and centres of excellence - all I can say about > > the ones I went to was they were bloody good at rugby league when I > > was at them! Some of you yankee boys weren't bad once over playing > > without armour. > > > Universities should be central to sport, theatre, art, collective > > education, carnival and so on - they aren't. We should be able to do > > university without the academic stuff if we aren't academic - it's > > only a tiny part of learning after all. Much the same on schools. > > The issues for me are about keeping Jimmy Saville types away - utterly > > crap UK paedo if you haven't heard. > > > Process philosophy is systems theory The maths I learned in > > statistical mechanics wasn't (by today's standards) right but it did > > 'work' reasonably well until we knew better - the crass normal > > distributions of economics don't work at all - except to funnel money > > to the rich. Most of my mates can't hack education like me - but they > > can do stuff I can't. I put my time in hitting the big guys in rugby > > with and without the ball - but I was protected from the attrition to > > allow what running/kicking genius I had and no one would pick me to > > stiff it out with the real physical specimens. I hope I gave people I > > taught a real chance to do what they could - some were better > > academics than me - but most couldn't get in that team. Just like > > some of the 'big dumb bastards' who created the space for me in rugby > > (some now professors) - there are those who fail school so badly they > > can't get into university - so why not change the rules? Your may not > > be as 'smart' as me Nom - no cock length test meant (you do too much > > of that sometimes) - but if you want to meet someone who will outdo us > > both an an practical intelligence tests come and meet my mate Ron. He > > can't properly read or write. Where do we get round thinking > > education (to make like a Duke) is a good thing? Proper discussion > > would be more like you or Chaz than that crap that cries ad hominem - > > though as I like you I resent or giggle at the notion of me presented > > as King's brown nose! Hope we are OK with this Nom - I think I like > > you! > > > On Jan 11, 9:46 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Never been convinced of the presumed basis of ontological/ > > > epistemological/methodological myself Nom. > > > > Oh sure.... next you'll tell me that you challenge mathematics..... > > > counting atoms...the periodic table.. etc, bringing it back to your > > > chemistry.....Maybe you can express your doubts as to lack of > > "conviction"? > > > or "convincedness" ? in ontology or epistemology.... as to methodology, > > > well, that depends on the method, I suppose.... > > > Deconstruct.... whenever I hear that word my skin crawls... now there's > > a > > > methodology that you should definitely debunk..... tripe.... > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction > > > binary tripe, to be precise....what those "phenomenologists" do not take > > > into account is the actual "structure" of the existing reality (be it , > > as > > > it is, a combination of Concept(idea) and reference(physical > > > thing).....they go off in their binary oppositions and wind up confusing > > > and confounding all "things" in all ways... > > > > Let's see if I can give you a fairly rudimentary example, from the Snow > > > White tale analysis.... what is an "apple", in that context? > > > Hello twonickles, > > > > Ok Nominal, I'm now throughly confused. Although I understand your > > > circle of roles, I can't seem to visualize what you're saying here: > > > > >>You have seen the Sign "Triangle" above... the distinction between: > > > > .........................Vox (Sign)......................... > > > > Conceptus (Idea).......................... Res (Matter).... > > > > Deos my addition of the dots help you visualize the "Triangle", as a > > > diagram? > > > If you have difficulty with "how" or "what" a Vox(sign) > > > "signifies"...... here's a very rough sample.... > > > > ...........................Apple.......................... > > > > Sustenance...............................Red,Round,Fruit.... > > > > Of course.... the concept and the reference side of the Sign "Apple" > > > varies from one "individual" (variety) to another and also on the > > > ammount of information that you want to supply on both sides.... talk > > > to a farmer or to a biologist about "apples" and you may learn a lot > > > more than you care to know.... > > > > nominal9 > > > > Twonickles & CC, et al (if you are still around).... > > > before I get to your latest question of the tie in to my "circle" of > > > roles.... I want you to consider how BillyO's "triangles" can be > > > disposed in the "square" of opposition.... remember? > > > **** > > > > Well that's enough for now.... Chew that over for a while. If y'all > > > want to continue... try to think how BillyO's Sign Triangle can be > > > used to "signify" the "Plan" and "Action" part of any given "Course of > > > Action". Then... try to think how the BillyO's sign "Triangles" can be > > > disposed in the traditional "Square" of logical Opposition.... If it > > > interests y'all, of course. > > > > nominal9 > > > **** > > > Let's start with the "Sign" APPLE (since that's the one I happened to > > > use as an example). I said that the sign APPLE could be thought of as > > > the following "Triangle": > > > ..................Apple................. > > > > Sustenance................... Red, Round, Fruit > > > > Now... here's a chance (?) complication.... what do y'all know about > > > Apple Seeds? Here are two links that explain what I'm getting at... > >http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/protec... > > > >http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/ge... > > > > So... it would appear that APPLE SEEDS, to the contrary, have the > > > following "triangle": > > > ...............Apple Seed........ > > > > Poison.........................Small, Brown, Pit > > > > So.... If you dispose the Possible "sign aspects" in the > > ... > > read more » -- 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.
