[MD] Science Wars

[MarshaV]

At 03:46 PM 4/19/2009, you wrote:
> > > > >[Marsha]
> > > > >By conventional truth I mean a pattern that is relational,
> > > > >ever-changing and conceptually constructed.  What of a conventional
> > > > >truth is shared?  Are you, six letters with some kind of relationship
> > > > >to crime, shared?
> > > > >
> > > > >[Krimel]
> > > > >Conventions may have those properties but a convention is shared. The
> > > > >term has no meaning in the context of the individual. Letters are
> > > > >shared conventions my explanation for the etymology of my name is
>likewise
> > > > > shared. In short EVERYTHING about a "conventional truth" is shared.
> > > > > That is what makes it conventional.
> > > >
> > > >Marsha
> > > >Can you name one static of pattern (meaning) that is shared
> > > >100%?    Each particular will have its little deviation.
> > > >
> > > >[Krimel]
> > > >Of course not, neither in terms of 100% of people agreeing nor of two
> > > >people sharing 100% overlap in understanding. Fortunately neither of
> > > >these is required of a conventional understanding. The issue is really
>about
> > > >how much overlap (short of 100%) do we actually need to communicate and
>share
> > > >understanding. The science of information theory is all about this.
> > > >Communication and convention are the ability the exchange meaning and
> > > >messages. Or to be more precise reduction in uncertainty. Evolutionary
> > > >success for example, depends in reducing uncertainty and ANY reduction
> > > >confers selective advantage. This is as true of memes are of genes.
>This
> >
> > > >is how we evaluate concepts and conventions. We determine how
>meaningful
> > > >they are by how well they reduce uncertainty. It is reduction not
>absolute
> > > >reduction that is critical.
> > >
> > >Marsha
> > >The existence of zebras is a conventional truth.  Are using the
> > >phrase 'conventional truth' differently?
> > >
> > >[Krimel]
> > >I think so unless this a trick question. I have experienced zebras and my
> > >individual concepts of zebrahood are different from yours but our shared
> > >convention with regards to zebras is a 'conventional truth' even though
> > >there is uncertainty as to the exact amount of overlaps in our individual
> > >experience.
> >
> >Marsha:
> >No trick question.  The visual pattern of a zebra may be similar
> >between the two of us, but "Is that all there is, is that all there
> >is.  If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep
> >dancing..."  Do you get what I'm suggesting?
> >
> >[Krimel]
> >Not really, but I am a glass half full kind of guy, I guess. What more
>would
> >you like for there to be?
>
>Marsha:
>More than a half empty kind of attitude, but maybe that is not you.
>
>[Krimel]
>And see there, all this time I thought I was trying to help you out with
>that.

Krimel,

I understand that we have different approaches to questions and 
problems.  I was not criticizing you as saying maybe reducing things 
to their bare minimum is your style.  I happen to think that past 
experiences tend to greatly influence patterns (conventional 
truth).  You may not think so.  That doesn't make me right and you 
wrong. It doesn't even give me the right to think I should get you to 
understand my point-of-view.  When this happen I just do not know 
what to say next.

Marsha







.
_____________

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.