[MD] irony and socrates

[Ian Glendinning]

These guys are teasing too Marsha ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/space/13lhc.html?_r=2&em

“a funny thing that could make us to believe in the theory"

Good science is mostly good jokes, like the LHC itself.

Regards
Ian

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:17 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> Ian,
>
> I was teasing.  In a QM lecture the prof told of how the label Qubit was
> first suggested as a joke.
>
> I understand the problem, but still think a Quantity Level would separate a
> subject/object reality from a Quality point-of-view and make understanding
> the difference obvious.  Are dualistic s/o type of thinking the same as SOM?
>
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 3:10 AM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] irony and socrates
>
> Hi Marsha,
>
> In that sense Bo and I are entirely in agreement - I've suggested that
> to him before too.
> (We still have to name this "level" and organize it relative to the
> others - as "part of" the MoQ.)
>
> Quality, Zoo and Qubit already exist as words, names for things.
>
> The thing we are looking for a name for is
> "non-irrational decision-making that takes patterns of value into account"
> Quintellect I suggested. (Wisdom is probably a perfectly good existing word
> ?)
>
> (For me, Qubit is a good alternative word for DQ - I say for me,
> because I have an informational or fundamentally epistemic view of
> metaphysics or even ontology.)
>
> Regards
> Ian
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:56 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>> Ian,
>>
>> Like Qubit?  Or how about a Quality zoo?
>>
>> I really think Bo is correct suggesting that a Quality-Level would do much
>> to untangle the SOM/MoQ point-of-view confusion.
>>
>>
>> Marsha
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
>> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ian
> Glendinning
>> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:52 AM
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Re: [MD] irony and socrates
>>
>> Bo suggests we
>> ""use" intellect's (S/O) while remembering MOQ's"
>>
>> Sure Bo.
>> All I'm suggesting is we give that idea a name ... like
>> MoQish-Intellect or "quintellect" maybe ... to remind us (and people
>> who've never had this discussion) that whilst we "named the object"
>> (as language appears to do) it's more than an intellect constrained by
>> SOMist objectivity.
>>
>> Sometimes I think Doug Renselle was on the right lines - inventing a
>> new language.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ian
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:31 AM,  <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
>>> Marsha, All
>>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>