From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jan 17 2002 - 18:15:58 MST
> But of course this reply is equally and exactly wrong; it is the other
> side of what ends up being the same coin. That we employ many different
> models of reality does not mean that there are many realities; there is
> only one reality, and "right"
Eli, i agree that the existence of multiple models of reality does not imply
the existence of mulitple realities. However, I nonetheless believe there
are both multiple realities and multiple models of reality, without a
one mapping between them.
> To walk the path of rationality means
> employing a series of successive approximations to reality, always being
> ready to discard one approximation when the better one is found.
And following Charles S. Peirce's philosophy of science -- we're creating
a series of approximations to a "truth" that can never be articulated or
expressed except via faulty approximations..
Given this fact, the assumption that there is only 1 reality is just as
ungrounded as the assumption that ther are many. Each of the approximations
to reality that reason makes, only narrows down the space of possible
a bit, it doesn't show that ony one true reality lies within this narrowed-
A good metaphor, in my view are uncomputable numbers. You can never express
an uncomputable number, never give a real example of one. Yet you can
a series of rational approximations to one, and know that you're getting
> confidence in self-rightness, and the denial of objective reality in the
> name of cultural tolerance,
I deny objective reality, but not in the name of cultural tolerance... just
there is no way we can know it to exist.
- ben g
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT