Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The administrations war

Expand Messages
  • shadowed_statue
    Hi Polly. You wrote [to Wil]: I suspect we are not going to get very far in our discussion. While you would talk about the ontological character of
    Message 1 of 55 , Aug 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Polly.

      You wrote [to Wil]:

      "I suspect we are not going to get very far in our discussion. While
      you would talk about "the ontological character of rationality itself
      which proceeds by the necessary character of truth functions" as
      though there is something self-evident there, I would want to discuss
      the behaviour of people who have lesions in Broca's and Wernicke's
      area of the brain, and how that affects their "rationality". I do not
      see a single point of contact between our two methods."

      You subsequently amplified [52675] your reference to Wernicke's aphasia by quoting from Wikipedia:

      "Speech is preserved, but language content is incorrect. This may vary
      from the insertion of a few incorrect or nonexistent words to a
      profuse outpouring of jargon. Grammar, syntax, rate, intonation and
      stress are normal. Substitutions of one word for another (paraphasias,
      e.g. "telephone" for "television") are common. Comprehension and
      repetition are poor.

      Example:
      I called my mother on the television and did not understand the door.
      It was too breakfast, but they came from far to near. My mother is not
      too old for me to be young."

      Now if I have understood what Wil was arguing - and it has to be said, that is quite a big if - and can accordingly extrapolate to your example, then those people who develop an aphasic mental condition are lacking the very possibility of discursive rationality, and are unable to understand or to communicate by availing themselves of the necessary character of truth functions, because disparate words become interchangeable. Wil's philosophical language is not a personal aberration, it is a form of precision whose justification you do not appear to respect. I am saying that I think the very poignancy of the condition to which you have drawn our attention is given its due by an attention to the ontological possibilities of the human being in a state of good health. You cannot expect of philosophy that it will offer a cure, but medicine does attempt to provide cures, and like other disciplines, medicine is guided by philosophical discourses. At least that is my current state of opinion. I am never all that sure of what I know. On this occasion, I was struck by how your frustration at what you saw as meaningless verbiage, on the contrary, illuminated the case you cited. I remember once hearing on the radio the reading of a novel, set in the 1980's, in which a group of aphasic patients in a hospital were gathered around a tv screen. President Reagan was making a speech. All the patients began laughing. I think rationality may exist in rudiments without recourse to language and the necessary character of truth functions.

      Louise
    • Mary
      Tom, Bohm actually agreed with Einstein that the Copenhagen Interpretation was incomplete. For a simple explanation, which also points to Bohm s relationships
      Message 55 of 55 , Aug 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Tom, Bohm actually agreed with Einstein that the Copenhagen Interpretation was incomplete.
        For a simple explanation, which also points to Bohm's relationships with Einstein and Murray Gell-Mann, you might google and read: Dialectical Materialism and the Construction of a New Quantum theory: David Joseph Bohm by Christian Forstner. Bohn's pilot wave theory dismisses the wave function as a mathematical entity and restores an objective universe wherein incomplete knowledge of the observer doesn't affect the location or momentum of an electron. The article also touches on something you mention from time to time, causality vs. chance. Bohm says both exist as complementary opposites. Mary



        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:

        What really matters for me is . the more active role of the observer in quantum physics . According to quantum physics the observer has indeed a new relation to
        the physical events around him in comparison with the classical observer, who is merely a spectator.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.