Jay Hanson wrote:
From: Tom Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's also clear to me that there is no point arguing with someone who
simply
repeats a particular "fact" or "law" as the conclusive answer to every
conceivable question. Science is science. Fundamentalism is fundamentalism.
The above
As and when a barrel of oil is a complex system then the analogy might
hold, but of course it isn't. I'm not going to attempt to summarize
Prigogine's ideas in a short message but take it up with him - he can
certainly punch his weight in intellectual terms and that is Nobel Prize
winner for this
From: Stephen Straker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whom the laws are about. Thus the level of unreflected
consciousness, which is one of the initial conditions
of such laws, can be transformed
Jay: This is not science.
Huh? What's so *un*-scientific about the observation that social
I am going to be silent for a few weeks. I need to start thinking
about my next essay. I have said all I can about the two kinds of
knowledge: "scientific" and "other".
"Other" knowledge comes from "visions" (or hallucinations) and,
except as entertainment, is of limited value.
"Scientific"
Brad McCormick wrote,
The above sentence should arouse every sleeping Hegelian/Marxist
For the dialectic says that A becomes other than A (even perhaps
while remaining itself) in the course of history.
For A to become other than A there has to be *history*, which is not an
empirical kind
OK lets get fairly heavy on this. In nonlinear systems where superposition
breaks down - another way to put this is to say that there is significant
interaction among components of the system - any lawlike statement can
only be absolutely contextual. There is no general covering law because
any
Jay Hanson wrote:
"Scientific" knowledge is empirical. It comes from actual studies
of the physical systems that control life on Earth.
In the hierarchy of systems, the physical systems are the most
important systems. If they go, there won't be ANY social systems.
Physical laws
This is a kind response I had when I asked for help from
scientists... Jay seems to forget that all "laws" whether
physical or social, are
only valid under specific conditions and systems.
Jay is not interested anymore (back in the ivory tower?)
... but as he says,
irrationality shouldn't go
and another one
Obviously, you are mistaken David. There are no exceptions to the laws
of thermodynamics. They apply everywhere -- even in your backyard.
The laws of thermodynamics tell us that you can not burn a barrel of oil
twice. It's like gravity -- you can try it at home.
Let
From: Durant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using the quick summary form "Entropy always rises in a closed system",
you can say yes, there are no exceptions. However, the law limits
itself to a certain class of situations. If the system isn't closed,
the law is still valid -- entropy still rises in closed
Durant wrote:
and another one
Obviously, you are mistaken David. There are no exceptions to the laws
of thermodynamics. They apply everywhere -- even in your backyard.
The laws of thermodynamics tell us that you can not burn a barrel of oil
twice. It's like gravity -- you can try
Don't feel badly folks. Desmond Morris says we are not fallen angels, but risen apes.I
say that every morning: "Oh, I'm so glad I'm not a fallen angel, but only a future
one." (Just throwing in a little levity to counteract the law of gravity that
permeates this list.)
Jay:
This really
12 matches
Mail list logo
