Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MikeL
climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
I've assigned a term paper on paradoxes and dilemmas for my grad students in a practical field of study as a means to get them to think deeply about issues in that field. I've been doing some additional research trying to respond to emails about the assignment, and I ran across this description from Wikipedia. I think it's relevant to this thread:
Bonini's Paradox, named after Stanford business professor Charles Bonini, explains the difficulty in constructing models or simulations that fully capture the workings of complex systems (such as the human brain). In modern discourse, the paradox was articulated by John M. Dutton and William H. Starbuck[2] "As a model of a complex system becomes more complete, it becomes less understandable. Alternatively, as a model grows more realistic, it also becomes just as difficult to understand as the real-world processes it represents" (Computer Simulation of Human Behaviour, 1971).
This paradox may be used by researchers to explain why complete models of the human brain and thinking processes have not been created and will undoubtedly remain difficult for years to come. This same paradox was observed earlier from a quote by Paul Valéry, "Everything simple is false. Everything which is complex is unusable." (Notre destin et les lettres, 1937). Also, the same topic has been discussed by Richard Levins in his classic essay "The Strategy of Model Building in Population Biology", in stating that complex models have 'too many parameters to measure, leading to analytically insoluble equations that would exceed the capacity of our computers, but the results would have no meaning for us even if they could be solved.' (See Odenbaugh, 2006).
(Also see the rather lengthy exposition on Wikipedia on Paradoxes, alone.)
Now that I think about it, the whole subjective-objective mapping issue Largo has raised might well be a paradox.
This got me thinking that paradoxes and dilemmas are only such due to an over-bearing (highly focused), analytical, logical, rational, scientific, calculating mental point of view of reality. If we were to take, for example, more of a mythical point of view on the world, we wouldn't be so stymied by contradictions and opposites. As Jung said, in mythical worlds people see opposites and contradictions as more complete statements of reality: positive-negative, sun-moon, dark-light, subjective-objective, earth-sky, good-bad, mother-father, life-death, etc.
Of course, paradoxes and dilemmas just tend to drive science-types bonkers.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Of course, paradoxes and dilemmas just tend to drive science-types bonkers.
not sure what you mean here... I think "science-types" embrace paradoxes and dilemmas because they offer an opportunity to understand something which when looked at by a number of different, but otherwise equally valid methods give different results.
That is an indication that the question, which always seems to be reasonable when initially stated, is meaningless, or that one or the other or both of the ways of obtaining the result are incomplete. Since we believe they are complete the challenge is to find where they aren't.
Science-types go bonkers trying to understand all of those things because they provide a way of learning more, understanding more... they won't let those paradoxes or dilemmas sit alone unconsidered, they seek resolution and understanding.
|
|
BASE104
climber
An Oil Field
|
|
National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Great place to go to set the time on your computers, watches, whatever. Their website is generally just cool to groove around on.
They measure everything.
http://www.nist.gov/index.html
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
I like to see myself as a humanist working from sound scientific priciples -
look into the facts/observation/what was said and done, do not jump to
conclusions, be clear about your reasoning, be open about your values,
let other people inquire into them and let your values go if you discover
that they are not well grounded. At work dilemmas are the "matter" I am
working with every day, unsoluble, but they may often be dealt with in a
better way.
There is nothing unscientific about dealing well with dilemmas, on the
contrary. Obviously one is also free to try to escape from them by
withdrawing from the other world and into subjective introspection or
meditation to let things go or by the help of drugs.
|
|
allapah
climber
|
|
how is it possible you love the mountain unless it be sentient?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
A humanist is selfish for he does not serve everyone, he serves his sense only.
Due to the spell of material nature the bewildered condition soul can not understand this simple fact .....
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
how is it possible you love the mountain unless it be sentient?
I love ice cream.
Dave
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 4, 2011 - 08:35pm PT
|
Ed says: You are missing what I'm inferring from that... if we can be mistaken in our inference of what Bev is experiencing, which we are sure to have done, not having the ability to actually be a part of her "1st person experience," we might also be mistaken when we look at our own experience of "1st person experience."
There are several ways to approach this, but the most realistic is to remember that subjective experience is not a "thing" having fixed values, rather it's a process that unfolds - a moving target. One of the challenges to knowing what we are feeling is that emotions are in fact energy-in- motion and as such they are ever changing. So the being "right" and "wrong" about our experience takes on entirely different meaning and results than if you were, say, trying to find the slope of the line through A and B, in terms of the y-coordinate of A (of course I know math, I just never talk about).
In one sense, all experience is true because it truly exists in our field of awareness. To the extent that our experience corresponds to physical reality is only one track, and we're all somewhere on the spectrum between hearing voices and seeing martians and Marlow believing that comely ballerina is up for the rub-a-dub, and the rest of us wandering around in various fits of fancy. Is a pure math dood wrangling theories of differentiation and integration and a poet noodling a trope - are either one "right," "mistaken," and in this context, is "real" and "material" the same thing.
The Zen concept of impermanence says that all "10,000" material forms are fundamentally UNREAL because everything is in flux and nothing lasts. The only real stuff is nothing at all (emptiness ~ presence ~ raw awareness).
JL
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
material forms are fundamentally UNREAL because everything is in flux and nothing lasts
They are temporary but are real.
It's poor fund of knowledge to say the material creation is unreal. That is misleading and not a fact.
The only real stuff is nothing at all
This is incorrect also and is the foundation of the Mayavadi theory.
Form is real as is formless.
They exist simultaneously .......
|
|
pa
climber
|
|
"By nature man possess blood and qi and a heart that allows awareness.
Grief, as well as joy, elation and anger do not exist permanently within. They are reactions to the incitement of objects.
It is then that the art of the heart intervenes."
Yueji, Book of Rites
I have found this helpful, in times of grief.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
. . . than if you were, say, trying to find the slope of the line through A and B, in terms of the y-coordinate of A (of course I know math, I just never talk about)
Uh, huh
A neat little trick I must say
To find the slope in this way
Perhaps you could please display
m=m(y(A))
(forgive me if I have misinterpreted what you were trying to say!)
Edit: OK, your original language was a little imprecise - a possible implication that only the y-coordinate is required. You've explained it.
|
|
MikeL
climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
Marlow said: "There is nothing unscientific about dealing well
with dilemmas, on the contrary. Obviously one is also free to
try to escape from them by withdrawing from the other world
and into subjective introspection or meditation to let things
go or by the help of drugs."
Escape? No, my friend. What I said is that a particular mindset
sees paradoxes or dilemmas, and I think I might see a reason for
why that might be. When you slice and dice the world analytically
(which is, as you may know, the very definition of analysis), you
create artificial entities (constructs, parsamonious theories,
variables, etc.--as the Wikipedia quotes noted) that are meant to
explain reality rigorously.
That approach destroys reality, or the ability to perceive Reality in
Its Entirety. Instead that approach creates discrete unreal things
that it hopes to put back together like Humpty Dumpty. But, there
are always too many pieces left over. The R-square of any
analysis is never 1.0, more usually around 3. to .6 at a .05 level
of confidence.
When our egos finally established themselves as autonomous,
independent, controlling entities and weakened the domination of
the unconscious, they separated themselves from the all in the
universe. They now stand in opposition to the Whole, and in
god-like fashion, they attempt to bring the All under its gaze and
will. The arrogance of it.
Escape? No, my friend. Not seeing paradoxes or dilemmas is not
an escape; it's an embrace.
I believe in science. I believe in other things, too, that I've
gotten access to subjectively. I've made some changes to myself,
and what I discovered is that when I changed, the world changed.
Is that a paradox or a delusion? Not this or that, not this and
that, neither not this nor not non-that. (What does that leave?)
Largo said: all experience is true.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
by parts: There are several ways to approach this, but the most realistic is to remember that subjective experience is not a "thing" having fixed values, rather it's a process that unfolds - a moving target.
no, it might be your interpretation of experience wrongly attributes subjective experience to having any relationship to that experience. For instance, it might just be reporting on what is happening, without having a role to play in shaping it... but you've misinterpreted the messenger for the message.
One of the challenges to knowing what we are feeling is that emotions are in fact energy-in- motion and as such they are ever changing.
once again, we don't know how the "emotions" connect to the rest of what is going on... a surge of testosterone the right time of the month might be expressed in affection... leading to a smile on Marlow's face... but maybe that's just how we explain after the fact that particular physical event, you don't know, your "model" assumes that the "experience" is right in there...
I'm suggesting that the "experience" is just an "after thought," a need to communicate what is happening, physically...
I also don't know what metaphor "energy in motion" is supposed to be, perhaps you should flesh that one out a bit, it's vacuous as stated.
In one sense, all experience is true because it truly exists in our field of awareness.
this is trite, if only because we know that our "field of awareness" leads us down many false paths, there is a whole literature built around "self delusion" where it is recognized that an individual believes that their experience is true and acts on it to dire consequences...
To the extent that our experience corresponds... devolves into something truly incoherent, perhaps you should rewrite it to express what you mean...
what I am positing here is that we might be completely mislead by our sense of "1st person experience" and think it to be something much more than it really is... you haven't really addressed that... and it's odd, because that idea meshes perfectly with many of the things you've been saying.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Speaking of the possibilities of being misled, I really liked DMT's reference above to conspiracy theorists as being deluded by seeing patterns where there aren't any.
Thinking of it as a brain problem makes more sense to me than looking at it as a social problem. Or perhaps we can say their brain problem becomes our social problem.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 5, 2011 - 01:06am PT
|
no, it might be your interpretation of experience wrongly attributes subjective experience to having any relationship to that experience. For instance, it might just be reporting on what is happening, without having a role to play in shaping it... but you've misinterpreted the messenger for the message.
The most fundamental flaw in all of your reasoning, Ed, is that there is some "objective messenger" who stands outside of 1st person experience and by way of the shrewdest measurements, can tell us what really and truly is.
What's more, you've bungled experience with false divisions insisting that objectifying is not qualia like sensations and feelings and all the other content in our experience. You are not, now or ever, going to arrive at a pure 3rd person perspective unfettered by the other messy stuff involved in being human.
But a more basic glitch in there is this idea of subjective experience fooling us, or giving us false information, or in our discursive minds misinterpreting our experience. The falsehood you're telling yourself is that the only valid indicator or reality is the 3rd person objective, which I have repeatedly told you is not the language of nor yet the relevant mode of the subjective galaxy.
The idea of feelings being e-motion or energy in motion is a standard POV of psychology that comes from people studying the mamiliian brain, the language of which is feeling or emotion. Felings are not fixed number or things, ergo the many words that express the idea of feeling tones, or phases. What's more, once you settle and dial into emotions you will quicky see that they move like the tide, like schools of fish, all blended and mixed and flowing. Very tangible stuff is you can just peel off the thinking cap for a moment.
JL
And John G., you're the math dood, but I seem to recall that the slope-point formula tells how to find the equation of a line given its slope and one point that it passes through.
y-y1=m(x-x1)
Perhaps no cigar, but that's got to be close.
JL
|
|
Dr.Sprock
Boulder climber
I'm James Brown, Bi-atch!
|
|
try to be more objective.
for instance, what would you do if you were at a new disc golf course in oroville ca and all of a sudden an ice cream truck started to circle around with some lame ass music song coming from a tweeter mounted on the roof,
you would
a buy an ice cram,
a) buy an ice cream, or,
a buy an ice cream?
this is mind.
this jus happened.
the stuff i wrote just happened.
how blessed do you feel to have me in your company?
i am the new jesus.
jim jones, your a Punk!
|
|
ruppell
climber
|
|
Spock Lay off the Cool Aid(except the purple stuff)
As far as mind goes well that's for each to decide
There is no set of repeatable circumstance that every one goes through.
My mind is different from your mind. It can be proven in no way shape or form. A brain is a brain. Same or similar neurological processes. Same size mass and density. So how can you ever agree on how HUMAN thought occurs?
An interesting idea to say the least but after this many people(some smart some not) give there input and you're not any closer to a resolution of the original question where to you say there is no answer. It's kinda like asking what's on the other side. Maybe one day will all know. Until then my mind and I are taking a walk.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Until then my mind and I are taking a walk.
You just answered the question unknowingly.
Unfortunately you probably can't "see" how ......
|
|
Dr.Sprock
Boulder climber
I'm James Brown, Bi-atch!
|
|
who wants to learn top secret mind altering scientology auditing?
|
|
Dr.Sprock
Boulder climber
I'm James Brown, Bi-atch!
|
|
it goes like this
first off,
pick the most horrendous experience of your life
2)when was it?
3)move to that incident
4)what do you see?
5)was there an earlier similar incident?
6)move to that incident
7)what do you see?
8)move through the incident
9)what happened?
10) i forgot the rest of the command so now you are in deep sh#t because we have to end session, there is nobody in the ivory tower, your visa has been declined....your checke has been cancelled, now get out!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!