[MD] Bo's weak versus strong interpretation of quantum physiks

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 24 Jul 2010 at 13:24, Krimel wrote:

[Platt]
So are politicians, journalists, lawyers and purveyors of radical left-wing 
propaganda. We are all human, and there are many methods for doing what we 
think best. God help us if there is only one right way to pursue our goals.
At the end of that road lies tyranny.    

[Krimel]
Politicians, lawyer and purveyors of propaganda are sophists. They make no
claim to honest inquiry they are advocates for particular points of view.

[P]
Your view is that the only legitimate "honest inquiry" is one that adheres to 
the assumptions and methods of SOM science. Fine for acquiring knowledge about 
inorganic and biological patterns. No argument there. But, not so good for 
social, intellectual and artistic patterns. And, no good at all for determining 
the value of anything. . 

[K]
Journalists have their own set of ethical guidelines for determining what is
worth reporting, how to report on differences of opinion and for assessing
standards of truth.

[P]
Lawyers follow strict rules of argument and evidence, politicians are held to 
account by the electorate, purveyors of propaganda exist in the eye of the 
beholder with journalists among the purveyors.

[Krimel said:]
For people committed to honest inquiry funding is a means
to an end and not as you would have the sole reason for being.

[Platt]
Not the sole reason, but an ever present influence.

[Krimel]
If you can't eat, you can't do much else. But oddly academia is an area
where people intentional sacrifice material comforts for the pursuit and
love of wisdom. Ask any graduate student.

[P]
Appears you equate "honest inquiry" with the academy and the academy with 
wisdom. Talk about hutzpah. As for sacrificing material comforts, there are 
millions of hard working people struggling to make ends meet who would love to 
get vacations every five or six weeks, three months off every summer, a year 
long sabbatical every seven years or so, and a guaranteed job for life.   

[Platt]
Are  you saying science doesn't have basic assumptions like determinism, 
reductionism, materialism and emergentism? 

[Krimel]
Of course science has basic assumptions. In fact it was scientists with
quantum mechanics and mathematicians, Gödel, who proved that uncertainty
with regard to basic assumptions is unavoidable. People in the academy
constantly question their own basic assumption and the fundamental
skepticism of science is built into the process. 

[P]
You mean science is skeptical of and constantly questions their assumptions of 
determinism, reductionism, materialism, and emergentism? I'd love to see some 
evidence. 

[Platt]
Nobody's work is static unless a robot, but many assumptions, like reality
being subjects and objects, are. You couldn't think at all without them.

[Krimel]
It is of course ludicrous to assert that one can't think without subjects
and objects. Systems theory, information theory, ecological models,
theology, literary theory and a host of other disciplines within the academy
work just fine without it. Nor is it true that assumptions are necessarily
static. Many disciplines are wary of their own basic assumptions and healthy
debates about those assumptions are conducted constantly.

[P] 
You mean to tell me that practitioners of the disciplines you mention think but 
don't believe they think about things? Who is doing all this "honest inquiry" 
if it isn't a subject looking at object data? That reminds me: we can add 
another assumption of SOM science -- externalism. 

[Platt]
As for transformation of society, the academy has played a role, but so have
entrepreneurs, bankers and artists. The question is: has the transformation 
been good? Pirsig sees some problems.    

[Krimel]
Entrepreneurs, banks and artists all effect transformations chiefly by
exploiting the fruits of the academy. Drug companies for example exploit the
basic research conducted within the academy. Artist likewise exploit the
advances from within the academy for their own purposes, Lucas, Cameron,
Ansel Adams, Annie Leibowitz, hell Da Vinci, Dali and a host of others come
to mind.

[P]
In the annals of history much knowledge has been gained and many inventions 
made outside the academy. The larger drug companies have their own research 
departments. Your list of artists who have used advances within the academy is 
unconvincing without evidence. As for who "exploits" whom, the prize goes to 
the academy who exploits the profits of enterprise, either granted voluntarily 
or, in many cases, by coercion. Where do you think those multi-billion dollar 
endowments come from? Where do you think those multi-billions are invested?

[K]
As to whether these transformations are good ask anyone who has had 10 or 15
years added to their life via bypass surgery or anyone who called AAA from
the side of the road, or anyone who has flown across country to visit
relatives or anyone buying tickets at a movie theater or anyone taking a
crap inside.

[P]
Or ask anyone who was machine-gunned in WWI, or anyone who was gassed in a 
shower room in WWII, or anyone leaped to his death from the Twin Towers on 
9/11.  

[K]
Pirsig sees problems? Wow, you mean the world's not perfect? I need to go
outside more but I'll say this; we are currently forced to deal with
problems that are considerably higher on Maslow's hierarchy than people
confronted 100 years ago or even 50 years ago.

[P]
The problem of honest inquiry a.k.a SOM science that I and Pirsig refer to is 
expressed well in this passage from Lila:

"In the time that Phaedrus grew up, intellect was dominant over society, but 
the results of the new social looseness weren't turning out as predicted. 
Something was wrong. The world was no doubt in better shape intellectually and 
technologically but despite that, somehow, the "quality" of it was not good. 
There was no way you could say why this quality was no good. You just felt it. 
Sometimes you could see little fragments of reflections of what was wrong but 
they were just fragments and you couldn't put them together. He remembered 
seeing The Glass Menagerie, by Tennessee Williams, in which one edge of the 
stage had an arrow-shaped neon sign flashing on and off, on and off, and 
beneath the arrow was the word, "PARADISE," also flashing on and off. Paradise, 
it kept saying, is right where this arrow points:
PARADISE "> PARADISE "> PARADISE ">
But the Paradise was always somewhere pointed to, always somewhere else. 
Paradise was never here. Paradise was always at the end of some intellectual, 
technological ride, but you knew that when you got there paradise wouldn't be 
there either. You would just see another sign saying:
PARADISE C> PARADISE "> PARADISE >" (Lila, 22)

[P]
Much good in the physical sense has come from SOM science and technology, but 
but it's a brittle good without knowledge or even awareness of an independent 
moral order.