[MD] cloud of probability

[118]

Hi David B.,

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:18 AM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> dmb quoted both of Pirsig's books:
>
> "Definitions are the FOUNDATION of reason. You can't reason without them." (Emphasis is Pirsig's. ZAMM, page 214.)
>
>
> "A metaphysics must be divisible, definable and knowable, or there isn't any metaphysics." (Pirsig in Lila, page 64.)
>
>
>
>
> Dan replied:
> Exactly. Come on, Marsha and Mark. If you want to know what gravitation is, look it up. Or even better, try reading ZMM... or re-reading it, or whatever it takes to get the ideas contained there to sink in. Good God almighty...
>
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> I sincerely wonder if Marsha and Mark are capable understanding this point. "Gravity" is a physical concept, a word with specific meanings. It is NOT an ineffable mystical reality.

[Mark]
Stop right there.  It is a physical "concept".  As such, it is a Ghost.

[dmb]
It's a scientific term that refers to a predictable, quantifiable,
repeatable action. On earth, I believe the formula is 32 feet per
second, per second.

[Mark]
Actually what you present above is acceleration and not gravity.
Gravity involves acceleration, mass, and distance between.  It is
often useful when described as potential energy.  Look it up.

[dmb]
In Newtonian physics it is a concept that gives precise meaning to the
fact that unsupported things fall to the ground and planets remain in
orbit. Einstein's physics uses this concept in a less mechanical and
more sophisticated way but it's still NOT mysticism. It's physics.
Physics must be divisible, definable and knowable, or there isn't any
physics.

[Mark]
In many ways physics is a form of mysticism.  Just because many of us
agree that it presents a reality does not make it any more real than
mysticism.  In fact, as a radical empiricist, I would think that you
would see mysticsm as more real than physics.
>
[dmb]
> To define "gravity" as the opposite of all that is non-gravity, as Marsha did, is just convoluted nonsense. It's a pointless logic loop whereby the term in question is twice negated so that one simply does a full circle right back to the term without adding anything at all. It is literally meaningless.

[Mark]
Yes, I agree.  Previously I have presented a method for determining if
something is "real" or "imaginary".  All imaginary things have an
opposite.  Real things do not.  An example would be a chair is real,
and fear is not.  This is useful in understanding Quality.  There is
no opposite to Quality, which makes it very real in my opinion.
>
[dmb]
> Definitions are the FOUNDATION of reason but Marsha "reasons" with her own private definitions. In her world - and what a lonely place it must be - static patterns are not static and they are not patterned. In open defiance of all the dictionaries, she imagines them as ever-changing clouds. To torture and abuse the english language in this way is to remove oneself from reason and intelligibility, to cut oneself off from communication with others and can only end in confusion, isolation and unhappiness.
>
> Can you imagine what would happen if someone answered questions this way in a court of law? At best, she would be cited for contempt or even declared mentally incompetent. A person exhibiting such behavior would end up in jail or even in a psychiatric hospital.

[Mark]
I am not sure, dmb, if you have ever sat on a jury.  Often the accused
does not take the stand.  Law courts are based on rhetoric, something
we are fond of in this forum.  The sophistry used by lawyers is used
to convince a jury one way or another.  The truth remains hidden, and
is inconsequential to the lawyers.

In terms of mentally ill, Pirsig speak of this at great length.  Many
mystical shamans are considered mentally ill when taken out of their
environment.  In some societies the "mentally ill" are reveared as
"seers".  In this country we do tend to lock them up of separate them
from the herd.  This is mainly because we are afraid of what they
represent.  That is the very thin nature of our reason.  If you have
ever tried peyoti you would know what I mean.

Thanks for your input.

Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>