Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Aug 31, 2014 - 11:15pm PT
|
Only because of the way math was taught. I also liked the article in that journal titled , "What if English were taught the same as math". As I read it, I realized that is how they teach English in Japan and why the kids hate it and are so bad at it. Yet they don't teach math that way in Japan and the Japanese do very well at it. Hmm.....Maybe we now need a Zen and the Art of Teaching?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
That blog on Zen and math wasn't very impressive IMHO.
Zen and the Art of Archery was more to the point.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
A good example of the influence of environment over mind.
i wish they would've had pics of the peoples. The taste of dog prolly had alot to do in shaping their attitude.
|
|
Mad69Dog
Ice climber
|
|
I don't read this place often, so it's easy to miss threads like this. So far I've just seen the first post.
"Since a strict computational model can be summarily ruled out, and a “brain is consciousness” model is insisting that an apple is an orange, and religious explanations are equally unsatisfactory, one wonders what direction is needed to wrestle this one down."
Science often is used like a filter, in an attempt to strip away the stuff that keeps one from seeing what's going on. Unfortunately, that filter sometimes introduces a bias into the measurement. Or worse, the researcher introduces a bias, sometimes subconsciously. But often, it's all we got, so why not learn to measure, and learn from our failures?
Religion seems to have more access to quantities of bias that are capable of causing death. WRT the "brain is consciousness" model, are you going to eat that orange?
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
Welcome to Mad Dog.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
^^^since they were the first to eat of the apple, they might as well eat the orange to.
Nice post though!
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 3, 2014 - 08:52am PT
|
Science often is used like a filter, in an attempt to strip away the stuff that keeps one from seeing what's going on.
-
Actually mind is what we use as a filter and "science" is one of our mental methods. "Science" does not exist separate from mind. For example, there are distances "out there" in objective reality, but they are not quantified until our mind assigns them a number. The number itself does not exist "out there."
Some would say numbers are like Platonic forms or Jungian archetypes, that they are basic inherent qualities of reality - but that's another subject.
JL
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Every tool, story, interpretation, drawing, concept is a filter.
Quit filtering. See what is there.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
To date there is no scientific evidence that the universe does not exist outside any individual's mind.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
I should have simply said that the mind is a filter.
Dilemmas. Paradoxes. For as far as the eye can see.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
One less tree, for starters.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
Dilemmas. Paradoxes. For as far as the eye can see. (MikeL)
Ain't it wonderful? It makes life exciting, an adventure.
Or is it better to sit like a stone in an ashram somewhere?
Nothing is better or worse . . . right, Mike?
;>)
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Right you are.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Tvash: To date there is no scientific evidence that the universe does not exist outside any individual's mind.
Although impossibility appears to be an impossibility these days, I don't think Tvash's claim above is any that science could properly make and prove--at least not using a "falsificationist" approach (using a hypothesis and null hypothesis test).
No one can say what is not existent. Scientifically, there is no method that I'm aware of to do so. (As for the statistics . . . pfffftttttt!)
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
That was a joke.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 3, 2014 - 04:36pm PT
|
"Science" does not exist separate from mind.
Fer fux sake Largo, that's precisely the point of "science": to understand the world (and ourselves) in spite of ourselves.
You mean in spite of sentience.
What we do when we objectify anything, is we frame it as an object and get to quantifying. That IS science. the "point" of science is to generate the measurements and work up our findings into thories, laws, etc. The "point" is not to do so "in spite of sentience," becuase that is totally impossible. Science does not DO the measuring. We do.
Or maybe you can explain how to do science sans subject.
The belief that we can do science with no human awareness, that somehow we suddenly become objects doing science, is not a well reasoned proposition.
What exactly would be the advantage of understanding the world by excluding our own experience, and again, how would this be achieved? Who would be "understanding the world?"
And if you are saynig that numbers exist totally outside of mind, then were are they - not the objects that are being measured, but the numbrs themselves.
And that tree in the forest question is not one most people actually understand. The question is not whether or not a falling object creates a disturbance (sound waves) in the atomic make up of reality, rather, what does "sound" mean in the context of the falling tree. Does it mean the 1st person experience of hearing, or are we refering to the sound waves that are heard. Can "sound" exist sans a mind to hear? Without ear and hearing, what are sound waves?
The age old tre in the forest question is to tease apart the habitual conflating that brains automatically do in order for mind to present us a seamless experience.
JL
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
And if you are saynig that numbers exist totally outside of mind, then were are they - not the objects that are being measured, but the numbrs themselves (JL)
This is mind-numbing.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 3, 2014 - 07:16pm PT
|
And if you are saynig that numbers exist totally outside of mind, then where are they - not the objects that are being measured, but the numbrs themselves (JL)
This is mind-numbing.
-
And yet it is exactly what is being said when someone says sentience is NOT part of science. It not only mind numbing, but just plain crazy talk. So at least we agree on that point.
JL
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!