> Humn... I don't see how you got *that* out of the preceding paragraph. But
> no, that's not what I'm claiming. I'm claiming that reality may:
> a) not have any intrinisic patterns, and any organization we percieve is
> imposed by the mind
> *or*
> b) reality has an intrinsic pattern that we percieve imperfectly because of
> our interior position in reality; ie, we cannot observe it without being
> involved in it.
I question your use of *or* here. Could it not be *and* and *or* as
well? Why the important stars?
> It's not that they can't *because* they are models; it's that they can't be
> tested because there is nothing to test them *except* models. There's the
> model that we manufacture through language and dialectic (like this one).
> Then there's the model in our head that is how we see the world, and we can
> compare our manufactured model to our learned/perceptual model, but we
> *cannot* compare either to the "reality model" because there is no way to
> access it except through the biases and interpretations and expectations
> imposed/created by the learned/perceptual model.
Yes! You can only critique a world view from within a worldview.
Science can critique itself, or religion can, but there is _no_ position
outside all worldviews from which you can stand to "clearly" critique
something.
> >It does work better. Unless you insist that planes only appear to fly.
Darn right. Planes only appear to fly. Science says that what we see
is valid, /is/ the world. So planes fly within the world view of
science. If you do not accept the scientific premise that what we sense
corresponds to reality, planes don't fly. But I think everyone (even
non scientists) accept that one.
> PS: I'm not trying to convince people not to use logic. If you want to use
> logic primarily, then fine by me. If it is fulfilling, okeydiddlydokey. No
> problems here, if you can live with the contradictions. I live with mine.
>
> What I object to is your dogmatic (as in, the Dogma of the CoV) position
> that logic is the only useful tool in all instances, and your insistence
> that anyone who does not share your trust in logic is a fool. Myself, I
> think you wear no clothes.
This is great. Logic is good. Faith is good. God is good. All just
tools to use when their use is (ummm) useful.
ERiC
Now if I could just get this position down deep enough into my meme
sphere that I didn't have to consciously think "my world view is that
there is no single valid world view... level 3 awareness is critical"
then I'd be set.