[MD] Quantum Physics

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

>From: Laird Bedore <lmbedore at vectorstar.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Subject: Re: [MD] Quantum Physics
>Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:58:21 -0500
>
> >
> >>> Dan:
> >>> Please explain how my comment is a tautology.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Laird:
> >> Your comment is a statement of evident fact. "Science is based on
> >> falsification" - yes, by definition of falsification. Attempts at
> >> science which do not adopt falsification are pseudoscience. Thus 
>science
> >> can only be science if it adopts falsification. On the MoQ, it was born
> >> through the process of falsification against the question "Is quality 
>in
> >> the subject or in the object?". It's like saying I must have a
> >> biological mother because I'm human (yup, it's a requirement of
> >> reproduction!). Circular truth, like the identity property of
> >> mathematics, is the case of "A implies A" in boolean logic: tautology.
> >>
> >
> > Dan:
> > A statement of evident fact!?! (After I had to explain the concept to 
>you!)
> > Okay. Have it your way. I guess hindsight is always 20/20.
> >
> >
>Laird:
>I well understood the concept already

Dan:
As I said, have it your way.

Laird:
>- you were applying a very
>specific scientific concept to a philosophical discussion through the
>use of a very conventional word.

Dan:
Guilty as charged. A person might have to actually think about what I said.

>I hope you can appreciate that the word
>"falsification" has other definitions that may also fit the discussion.

Dan:
Not in this context.

>
>Email is indeed a challenging way to communicate.
>
> >> Laird:
> >> If you're planning on using falsification outside the confines of
> >> science, the above is tremendously important. Falsification is a tool
> >> focused on the tasks of science, and using it outside of those confines
> >> requires that special care be taken. It's like using a screwdriver to
> >> mount a tire to a wheel - yeah, it can be done, but compared to using a
> >> tire spoon you've got to be really careful not to puncture the tire or
> >> scratch up the rim.
> >>
> >
> > Dan:
> > No plans really. I mentioned it merely in passing. Some time ago I 
>shared a
> > url with the discussion group to a story about how grand master chess
> > champions use falsification in their games sometimes without even 
>knowing
> > what they're doing. It struck me that Robert Pirsig was doing the same 
>with
> > the MOQ. I found it interesting and thought others might as well. Since 
>the
> > concept is evident fact to you though, I apologise for wasting your 
>time.
> >
>Laird:
>It is interesting, but it may help to reflect on the falsifiability of
>this very observation. If not careful, you might see the falsifiability
>principle everywhere.

Dan:
Can you spell "condescending"? I knew you could!