Re: Non-Faith and Science (was comm.)
Posted by
Russell Standish on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Re-comm-was-Re-FW-Re-Emergence-Seminar-BritishEmergence-tp3654051p3661594.html
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:28:39AM -0700, Miles Parker wrote:
>
> On the other hand, there does seem to be self-awareness of some kind, so
> that we cannot say that we don't exist. If we then simply say, "reality is
> whatever context this self-awareness occurs in" then that is
> self-referential, but I don't have a particular problem with it.
>
> On Sep 17, 2009, at 12:14 AM, russell standish wrote:
>
>> You tell me. Just what is the notion? Reality could mean:
>>
>> 1) What kicks back. Johnson's stone, or Doug's hammered thumb
>> 2) Elementary particles
>> 3) Force Fields
> ...
>> The truth is that the word reality has been debased so much it is
>> virtually meaningless, unless very carefully qualified.
>
> I'm curious what such a qualification would look like?
>
RITSIAR is one such qualification. And it is rather similar to what
you were talking about in the previous para.
Cheers
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics
UNSW SYDNEY 2052
[hidden email]
Australia
http://www.hpcoders.com.au----------------------------------------------------------------------------
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org