Skip to main content

View Diary: ACM: Can the human mind comprehend today's world? A challenge to all who engage in politics (208 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You raised the issues: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    don mikulecky, Diane Gee

    Let's just take one.  You said there is a new epistemology -in other words a new way we can obtain knowledge.  Is it by observation of reality?  Trances?  ESP?  The Bible?  The Pope?  Nothing new about those, however.

    So what is yours?

    What would Mothra do?

    by dov12348 on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 06:11:52 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The new epistemology is spelled out (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lehman scott

      in many books.  It is the compliment to reductionism in a scientific setting.  Here is an old example for starters:Epistemology and Rosen’s Modeling Relation

      Rosen’s modeling relation (MR) provides a powerful method of understanding and exploring
      the nature of the scientific method. Of course, the scientific method is itself epistemology in action.
      A decade ago Robert Rosen published an essay [1] on epistemology in honor of David Bohm. The
      explanation and use of the MR in that essay appeared as a revelation that evidently had great explanatory power and seemed to invite further development as an epistemological tool. The scientific
      method currently receives lip service but little practical understanding in the day-to-day lives of scientists. The method seems to exist more as a topic of intellectual discourse than a guide to pragmatic
      behavior even though it has been discussed at length by many philosophers, including Karl Popper
      [2]. A clear and simple model of the scientific method contributes a clarity that volumes of philosophy cannot provide.
      To provide an appropriate conceptual setting for the extended MR developed here, the necessary background and vocabulary are first presented. Popper’s 3 worlds are then suggested as a “container” for the MR. The ensuing framework allows one to analyze the MR itself, seeing how its parts
      fit onto the world of organisms, objects, brains, and theories—that is, the exceedingly complex, natural world comprised of all those atoms in their remarkable manifestations “of ships and shoes and
      sealing wax and cabbages and kings.”
      As examples of embedding the MR in the 3 worlds, Popper’s problem of demarcation between science and pseudo science is revisited. The famous Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper serves to
      introduce the use of the MR as a tool for thinking. Finally, a mathematical definition of “bizarre”
      systems, based on a real-world bizarre object, is suggested. The definition m
       Bill Dress is a quantum physicist working on the newest stuff in that field.

      An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

      by don mikulecky on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 06:21:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Questioning a premise. (0+ / 0-)

        To what extent does the scientific method utilize induction?

        What would Mothra do?

        by dov12348 on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 06:49:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  meaningless question....you can't (0+ / 0-)

          quantify such things....lots of debate...Popper had his ideas others disagreed.  The issue is not that at all.  The issue is how do you integrate science and all other forms of human knowledge and come up with a way of rejecting bad models.  We have a handle on that.

          An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

          by don mikulecky on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 06:54:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Okay. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Diane Gee

            You've convinced me there's no way you can communicate your position through a diary.  Which is ok - I guess people would just have to read your book.

            What would Mothra do?

            by dov12348 on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 06:55:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hate to find you wrong again. (0+ / 0-)

              Have done it many times.  I wish I could help everyone but the world is diverse and some comprehend better than others.   I never remember you trying to understand before so maybe it takes time?

              An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

              by don mikulecky on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 07:02:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I am acquainted with the EPR Paradox and (0+ / 0-)

        have read Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order.  While I find his Holographic Paradigm rather interesting in a discussion of fundamental epistemology, I think the possibility of its practical applications to real-world problems is very remote at best.  Does your book attempt to do this?

        Pessimism of the intellect; optimism of the will. - - Antonio Gramsci

        by lehman scott on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 07:31:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You missed the point...we worked with Dress (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lehman scott

          and others years ago bringing the new paradigm to birth...so I thought it might be an example of how widespread the ideas are...we are well beyond that 1999 stuff now...here's the book:Global Insanity: How Homo sapiens Lost Touch with Reality while Transforming the World

          The Global Economy that sustains the civilized world is destroying the biosphere. As a result, civilization, like the Titanic, is on a collision course with disaster. But changing course via the body politic appears to be well nigh impossible, given that much of the populace lives in denial. Why is that? And how did we get into such a fix? In this essay, biologists James Coffman and Donald Mikulecky argue that the reductionist model of the world developed by Western civilization misrepresents life, undermining our ability to regulate and adapt to the accelerating anthropogenic transformation of the world entrained by that very model. An alternative worldview is presented that better accounts for both the relational nature of living systems and the developmental phenomenology that constrains their evolution. Development of any complex system reinforces specific dependencies while eliminating alternatives, reducing the diversity that affords adaptive degrees of freedom: the more developed a system is, the less potential it has to change its way of being. Hence, in the evolution of life most species become extinct. This perspective reveals the limits that complexity places on knowledge and technology, bringing to light our hubristically dysfunctional relationship with the natural world and increasingly tenuous connection to reality. The inescapable conclusion is that, barring a cultural metamorphosis that breaks free of deeply entrenched mental frames that made us what we are, continued development of the Global Economy will lead inexorably to the collapse of civilization.

          An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

          by don mikulecky on Sun Jun 09, 2013 at 07:40:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (60)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (23)
  • Environment (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (16)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (16)
  • Economy (15)
  • Republicans (14)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Racism (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site