What are you on about? How is this related to FONC? David
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 3:10 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What sickness science brings to everyday people! They cannot even believe > in mysterious things, such as the divine, without first thinking it has to > show up on a laboratory microscope. > > The petri dish has to exist before the thing will be acknowledged as > fitting inside a petri dish. > > "We don't have a petri dish for that. It cannot exist. I cannot study it > inside of its petri dish." > > "Tell me where its petri dish is first, then I will believe you and we > will go study it." > > Mystical things of the past are regarded as superstition, described in > terms of theoretical, mechanical concepts. Automobiles, air planes, and > light rail trains are the indicators of supreme accomplishments given to > man by this modern science. > > Computers, electronics are never questioned for what they are underneath-- > a huge mess of chemical circuits. Contemptible expediency in its approach > to making its own version of warped plastic and silicon clockwork. > > Cram as much as you invent into the smallest space possible, sheath it > with cosmetic jewelry cases, and sell it to the world, telling the world it > is pure jewelry, inside and out. When it happens to hit the floor, the lie > is exposed-- a mess of soldering, wires, and toxic chemicals. > > Dazzling athletics, to cram this inelegant approach to match the world's > demand for novelty and excitement. > > Pack it all into a tiny package. Call it sheer wizardry and a triumph of > modern science. Its engineers confounded by accusations of philistine > circuitry-- "engineering, math, and science works! our engineering campus > buildings are not ugly-- they are utilitarian! I like math and was good at > it in high school." > > If the shoe fits, wear it regardless of whether the shoe is distasteful in > appearance on the outside. Make a distasteful shoe, cover it up with a > cosmetic shell. Where there is a problem, an engineer will solve it. Make > sure that you don't need a solution you want to know about, however. Just > be content that a problem was solved and look the other way when the > details are explained of its operation. > > "That'll do the trick." > > I didn't like parabolas because the world cannot be reduced to two, three, > or four axes, thank you very much. > > I don't like polynomials because I want to draw the line before I call it > a function of the world, saying that the world consists only of > deterministic, reductionist functions. "Oh, then you are just tired of > 'discreteness' and you need its polar opposite of discreteness, > non-discreteness." > > Such is mathematics and science today. "Why does no one want to learn > math and science anymore??" > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
