11-13-2020, 08:33 PM
** 13-Nov-2020 World View: Automata
Really? Einstein might disagree.
Really? What's the sum of the interior angles of a triangle? You'd
say 180 degrees, and might think that's "absolute truth", but some
people would disagree with you.
Does 1+1 = 10?
Is every statement either true or false? There are whole branches of
philosophy that deny the Law of the Excluded Middle.
In mathematics, is every true statement provable? Is every provable
statement true. I don't think so. Absolute truth doesn't exist
anywhere, even in mathematics.
I disagree that mice are more instinctive than humans. I disagree that
people who are being watched will necessarily change their behavior.
The entire Greek Tragedy paradigm is that the march to catastrophe
cannot be prevented, even by people who foresee the catastrophe,
even when the protagonists are being watched.
Let me give an interesting analogy.
Suppose you throw a rock into a pond, and you see the waves form.
That MUST happen. The wave MUST form according to a certain
mathematical formula. It's physics.
Now dive into one of the waves and look around you. You're surrounded
by individual water molecules. Think of the water molecules as your
friends or, if you prefer, think of yourself as one of the water
molecules. Each molecule is an individual that has free will, and can
go wherever it wants, and drift left or right or zip around, whatever
its little water molecule heart desires.
Each individual water molecule can do what it wants, but the water
pond as a whole MUST act in a specified way, according to a
mathematical formula. The water molecules can do what they want
individually, but as a group they act in a specific way according to
the laws of physics.
As you say, each individual in a society is not an unthinking
automaton. He has free will to do what he wants. But the society as
a whole must act in the way specified by generational theory. That's
why I keep saying that major events are not determined by politicians,
who are just individuals with free will. Major events are determined
by entire populations, entire generations, that must act according to
the generational waves specified by generational theory.
Tsk tsk. As usual, I'm the only person in this generational theory
forum who actually considers generational theory to be valid.
(11-13-2020, 03:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > I remember reading a freshman physics text in college. It stated
> that the inverse-square law applying to gravitation is correct to
> a level of certainty to roughly one in a billion for the
> exponent. That was in the 1970's. That was extremely
> convincing. Something similar was said of electrical charge and
> magnetism.
Really? Einstein might disagree.
(11-13-2020, 03:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > Absolute truth is possible only with ideals such as geometric and
> physical constructs. Once one enters the real world of physical
> objects and especially sentient creatures, things start to
> diverge.
Really? What's the sum of the interior angles of a triangle? You'd
say 180 degrees, and might think that's "absolute truth", but some
people would disagree with you.
Does 1+1 = 10?
Is every statement either true or false? There are whole branches of
philosophy that deny the Law of the Excluded Middle.
In mathematics, is every true statement provable? Is every provable
statement true. I don't think so. Absolute truth doesn't exist
anywhere, even in mathematics.
(11-13-2020, 03:47 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: > Historical predictions are not science. People are not unthinking
> automata. People who know that they are being watched will change
> their behavior. Even a mouse does. (There was a mouse that became
> an unwelcome guest, and we have a cat in the house. The mouse
> could smell the cat and avoid it. It couldn't resist the lure of
> peanut butter within a mouse trap, and it died in the mouse
> trap. Mice are more instinctive than we are.
I disagree that mice are more instinctive than humans. I disagree that
people who are being watched will necessarily change their behavior.
The entire Greek Tragedy paradigm is that the march to catastrophe
cannot be prevented, even by people who foresee the catastrophe,
even when the protagonists are being watched.
Let me give an interesting analogy.
Suppose you throw a rock into a pond, and you see the waves form.
That MUST happen. The wave MUST form according to a certain
mathematical formula. It's physics.
Now dive into one of the waves and look around you. You're surrounded
by individual water molecules. Think of the water molecules as your
friends or, if you prefer, think of yourself as one of the water
molecules. Each molecule is an individual that has free will, and can
go wherever it wants, and drift left or right or zip around, whatever
its little water molecule heart desires.
Each individual water molecule can do what it wants, but the water
pond as a whole MUST act in a specified way, according to a
mathematical formula. The water molecules can do what they want
individually, but as a group they act in a specific way according to
the laws of physics.
As you say, each individual in a society is not an unthinking
automaton. He has free will to do what he wants. But the society as
a whole must act in the way specified by generational theory. That's
why I keep saying that major events are not determined by politicians,
who are just individuals with free will. Major events are determined
by entire populations, entire generations, that must act according to
the generational waves specified by generational theory.
Tsk tsk. As usual, I'm the only person in this generational theory
forum who actually considers generational theory to be valid.
