Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More

4Re: [Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science] Inter-disciplinary activities

Expand Messages
  • Robert Parr
    Nov 8, 2005
      Re: [Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science] Inter-disciplinary activities John,

      I think our last two posts are important.  They show we have a lot in common, but we don’t talk in lock step
      as many elected “public servants” do.  This should be a reassurance to those who we hope will join us that
      we will be able to look at topics from differing viewpoints.  Now that that has been accomplished, until we have more
      People to join us-----Back to your laboratory!  I need to get back to my reading and writing.

      Best wishes to your whole family,

      Parr


      On 11/7/05 2:55 PM, "John Schmidt" <mindbrainsoul@...> wrote:

      --- In Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science@yahoogroups.com,
      "robparrl2" <robparrl@k...> wrote:

      > The working scientist and mathematician have tried to keep
      philosophy and religion] out of their work since the Enlightenment.

      [JWS] There have been forms of human thought and behavior practiced
      under the banner of "philosophy" that are hard to fit into the world
      view of modern science. There are religiously-motivated attitudes that
      come into conflict with science. Upon making such observations about
      the conflicts between science, philosophy and religion it is tempting
      for working scientists to try to distance themselves from these
      distracting conflicts.

      However, an alternative is to seek consilience between disciplines in
      the sense outlined in E. O. Wilson's book, Consilience. At the very
      least, scientists can try to understand religion, philosophers can try
      to understand science and religiously motivated individuals can try to
      have a realistic understanding of the relationship between religion
      and science. These kinds of understandings between different types of
      people as being fundamentally dependent on how we use language.

      Can we unify the conflicting views of reality that arise from a group
      of blind men who are each holding onto one part of an elephant? I
      think the differing views can be unified if all the blind men keep
      talking and share their experiences. We are all able to recognize the
      limitations of our personal perspective and work with others so as to
      try to attain an objective and unified view of reality.

      > philosophic bias may reside in any
      > particular science

      [JWS] I would just make the flat statement, "philosophical bias
      resides in any science."

      We strive for greater objectivity. This is where intelligent and
      informed outsiders can be useful. Philosophers and sociologists can
      observe the sciences and point out the existing biases. Philosophers
      can perform thought experiments that might knock scientists out of
      their useless ruts.


      >I have come to think of Wittgenstein more as an un-philosopher, a
      > thinker, rather than a philosopher as ordinarily understood.

      [JWS] I guess some people either go through life never making a
      serious error (unlikely) or they learn to live with habits that make
      errors comfortable. I think Wittgenstein tried to practice an
      intellectual honesty that did not allow him to pretend that any idea
      is OKAY when he could sense that the idea had defects or retained the
      slightest hint of error. Most of us are in too much of a hurry to
      allow ourselves to pass up ideas that are good enough for practical
      use. We adopt half-baked ideas and get on with life as best we can.
      This is pragmatic, but eventually it leads us as individuals and as
      whole societies to run up against our limitations. Eventually our
      socially constructed fantasies collapse. We could use many more
      Wittgenstein's who have the courage to point out the fantasies before
      they reach critical mass. And we need ways of forcing more people to
      listen to these warnings.


      > He had his work and science had
      > its own work,  They were not to be confused.

      [JWS] I have no objection to philosophers or thinkers or anyone trying
      to do useful work outside of the confines of conventional science.
      However, in my view, anything that is a useful human activity can be
      accommodated with science. Science is not monolithic, but science
      grows so as to absorb any useful approach to learning about the world.
      The process by which new ways of learning about the world are created
      is a process that everyone can participate in. I find Wittgenstein to
      be interesting because he was going after problems that had not yet
      been fit into science. All of existing science could not deal with the
      problems that Wittgenstein was working on. In many cases, I think
      science is now catching up and it is useful for scientists who are
      interested in language, the brain and psychology to look back at what
      Wittgenstein was able to accomplish from outside of science before
      neurobiology began to mature.

      -John Schmidt





       

       
       
      SPONSORED LINKS
                
        
      Ludwig wittgenstein <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ludwig+wittgenstein&w1=Ludwig+wittgenstein&w2=Analytic+philosophy&w3=Bertrand+russell&c=3&s=72&.sig=q-JlIrzFekpCfgEkpj1Z_g>   Analytic philosophy <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Analytic+philosophy&w1=Ludwig+wittgenstein&w2=Analytic+philosophy&w3=Bertrand+russell&c=3&s=72&.sig=j7WiQH812Ai2gOfEthXewA>   Bertrand russell <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Bertrand+russell&w1=Ludwig+wittgenstein&w2=Analytic+philosophy&w3=Bertrand+russell&c=3&s=72&.sig=TeYNKSqYhnj-N32F6TkFWg>          
       
       

      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


       



    • Show all 5 messages in this topic