On 02 Jul 2009, at 00:22, John Mikes wrote:
> I don't deny the practicality of applying 'numbers-based' science in > sending a man to Mars, but it is NOT the numbers that does the job. > It is the complexity of the state of the art we reached, which > includes science, technology, skills, ideas AND of course numbers- > application. Bohm's idea - as I understood it - was that searching > nature, you do not bounce into numbers, you can observe 3-leaf or > 4legged and manyshaped things, big and small, YOU (the human) can > 'count them' if you invented the symbols 1 2 3 4 etc. but these > refer to quantities and it required lots of abstracting in mental > evolution to arrive in a numbers-based math - how humans think about > nature. I know well that theory. It is based on the idea that some primary Nature exists. A common "superstition" among christians and atheists. Which could be true, actually. I don't know. But what I am almost completely sure, is that if comp is true, then it is has to be supersitution. And that is what I try to explain. > Thanks again and my mind works in crooked ways, if you can excuse me > for that. It seems I need too much learning to catch up. You are welcome. If you have the time and courage, I really encourage you to follow the thread. You may be surprised ... soon! Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
