[MD] Speed of Lighting, Roar of thunder...

[Magnus Berg]

On 2010-08-24 23:56, Krimel wrote:
> [Magnus]
> I'm confused, first you agree with Frank who said:
>
> [Krimel]
> Yes, you are but I think that's because this is confusing. After 10 or so
> years of having it explained to him Bo never got it, after all.

Ha ha.

> [Magnus]
> But now, you say that the universe did exist before anyone had
> conceptualized it.
>
> [Krimel]
> Isn't this the point of Pirsig's gravity example? Gravity is a signifier
> that points to a set of patterns in the world. I do believe that things fell
> to earth prior to Newton and at more or less that same accelerating rate
> that he clocked. But the concept of gravity was a new thing under the sun
> when he wrote it down.

I'm actually not sure it was the point of Pirsig's gravity example. I 
mean, he didn't have the tools of the levels when he wrote that in ZMM. 
To me, it's just a clear cut example of the creation of an intellectual 
pattern, the concept, or theory of gravity in this case.

Gravity, on the other hand, is an inorganic pattern that has existed 
since the big bang. I have no idea why people would want to deny that 
when it's so plain to see the connection.

> [Magnus]
> Does it still exist outside of our concepts of it? Or did it seize to
> exist when we conceptualized it?
>
> [Krimel]
> I would say yes that something undefined is going on whether we see it or
> not or whether we have concepts about it or not or whether our concepts are
> right or wrong. Shit still happens regardless of whether or how we think
> about it.

So you weren't actually so serious about the STFU after all?

What I'm saying is that since we have this tool of the levels, and since 
it *is* a rather good fit for dividing this undefined which is going on 
outside our concepts of it, why not try to make it a better fit?

In fact, why assume that whatever is going on is more complicated than 
it has to be? If nobody is here designing it, how *could* it be very 
complicated? And isn't the levels an example of the most simple 
construction? One static level does whatever it can using the static 
rules it has to work with, and then when that level is done and reaches 
a kind of static state, then the next level can work with that and 
create more dynamic things.

I do *not* understand the rationale for not even trying to make that 
better fit.

> [Magnus]
> I think you need to decide which. You seem to be taking both sides now.
>
> [Krimel]
> I decided long ago but despite what anyone tells you I hold open the
> possibility of changing my view. Never-the-less this is one of my chief
> bitches against the AWGI faction.

Decided long ago? But just the other day you underlined one side with 
STFU, and today you conceded to the other.

AWGI?
After Work Genuine Intelligence
All World's Gone Insane
All Who God Invented


No, I give up. What?

	Magnus