Go Back   Science Forums
View Single Post
Old 05-28-2007   #195 (permalink)
ldsoftwaresteve's Avatar
ldsoftwaresteve
Explaining


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: Defining the nature of rational discussion!

Our perception works well enough for us to get by and survive. I'm not arguing against that Questor. Within that framework, within our capacity to comprehend using the tools that we have we function just fine.

And if 'rational' applies only to that context, well, then we are rational creatures.

I'm trying to explain a concept that is based upon the idea that what we see is a derivative of what is really going on below the surface. That we do not, in fact, comprehend or perceive existence correctly.

Suppose there are creatures that literally can perceive the underlying functions of the universe. To them, reality must look a lot different than it does to us. Would the concept of rational be different for them? Would we appear rational to them? Would they even require such concepts?

The reason I'm slipping that into the discussion is that if rational is connected to valid perception, then how we perceive existence is germane.

A big tipoff that we don't approach the study of life (and rational is a concept that applies only to a living thing) from the correct direction is that we don't categorize living things according to the way they perceive existence. It's the very act of perceiving that identifies a living thing. And yet, that's an 'oh, by the way' sort of identification when it comes to life forms.

We've made it a quantitative set of identifications, so we are blind to the significant aspect of life: perception.

When we get to 'discussion', we are in the realm of the explanation. And that's where Doctor Dick wants us to be. And I suspect that the difficulty I'm having in understanding the concept is that my perception of the referents is not clear enough or I'm facing the wrong direction or both.

He has a mathematical treatise on the subject and I suspect he's trying to also explain his idea verbally which is why he keeps torturing himself and coming back here. The math has apparently delivered a contradiction of something we thought we understood. And my gut tells me that's what he's trying to get across. In other words, he thinks we have a blind spot.

Last edited by ldsoftwaresteve; 05-28-2007 at 09:03 AM..
Reply With Quote
 
» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:21 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network