|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
96.250.187.180
In Reply to: RE: You are logically challenged. posted by Tony Lauck on November 03, 2012 at 09:34:47
Oh ... you really want to go there!? ... OK!The Eulerian Circles you show, first mathematically described by Joh Venn in 1880, in a paper entitled "On the Diagrammatic and Mechanical Representation of Propositions and Reasonings", actually support my logic.
Take the A circle as Measurment and B as Perception. Where the two circles overlap is where measurement and observation co-exist and relate within their respective context. This is referred to by Venn as the "Intersection". Where they do not intersect is where measurement and perception diverge, each within there own "Relative Compliment".
The non-intersecting area on the left is where measurement extends beyond the scope of perception and is based in empirical data. On the opposite area perception is relagated to non-scientific speculation and assumption since it has no connection to to empircal data found in the set to the far left. This is referred to by Venn as the "Symmetric Difference". In this case there is no Absolute Compliment, although one could argue products marketed for non-existant phenomenon like "skin effect" in audio cables could fall into this set for either Relative Compliment.
Clarence Irving Lewis in 1918, in his book "A Survey of Symbolic Logic" actually used the example of scientific method & perception as separate sets to demonstrate what he called "The Venn Diagram".
I studied Philosophical Design & Logic at MIT and read all the works of Clarence Irving Lewis, John Venn, Leonhard Euler and others.
Well ... you went there... Spock would be proud! :-)
JRL
Edits: 11/03/12 11/03/12Follow Ups:
Positivist epistemology is not the only type of epistemology. There is more to this world than can be ascertained by present-day science (as the history of Science itself would indicate). Indeed, it is reasonable to believe that there is more to this world than can ever be known by future science. (The human mind is finite in its capacity for conscious thought and the method of induction from empirical evidence is not a certain process for arriving at truth.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Awesome!
However, that cannot be said about known creations that are distinct manifestations of the human consciousness and condition, such as music. We know how it sounds, and we can quantify it, and we have the knowledge to reproduce it accurately.
Human ignorance or arrogance denies our choices from being aided by this accumulated knowledge and we instead rely on the words (or cons) of others. This is anti-knowledge in the arrogant idea that mans senses can divine all and alone, irregardless of established known fact.
Audio existentialism, hmm? [index finger to side of nose]
Next!!!!
"Audio existentialism, hmm? [index finger to side of nose]"
"That which comes within the orbit of the mind is but a relative truth, not an eternal truth, and so it will come and go. Scriptures and mythologies are like stacks of bricks: they are only arranged in layers, bearing no significance or intrinsic value. How can they describe or explain that ultimate entity which is beyond the scope of the mind? Here both the teacher and the disciple are helpless, because this subject, which is beyond the domain of any academic discourse and discussion, is simply inexplicable and inexpressible. Whatever is said and discussed comes within the scope of the mind and so it is a relative truth – true today, false tomorrow." - P.R. Sarkar (commenting on the Buddhist Sádhaka Krśńácárya)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: