From: John K Clark (johnkc@well.com)
Date: Mon Jun 01 1998 - 23:03:44 MDT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 01 Jun 1998 Ian Goddard <igoddard@netkonnect.net> Wrote:
>IAN: The question/answer is fuzzy, yes! But the fuzziness measures a
>disjunction between (1) our questions, words, and concepts and (2)
>physical reality. Number 2 is, in and of itself, true by 100%, but
>the match between 1 and 2 may or may not be true by 100%.
So questions that seem perfectly meaningful, reasonable and clear cut to
humans (Did the particle go through the left slot or the right slot or both
slots or no slot?) are really ambiguous (How long is a piece of string?)
or gibberish (Did the klognee go through the fisben or the onrobonob?).
The trouble is this question is as simple and basic as it's possible to ask
and you're saying we can't even get that one right. Well maybe, but if so then
the word "truth", that after all humans invented, can't have much meaning.
It seems to me saying our most basic questions are fuzzy but the truth is
clear cut is equivalent to saying our questions are clear cut but the truth
is fuzzy, one is just a euphemism for the other.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBNXN06X03wfSpid95AQEK8wTwvcewB6EhBLnyUaRH1wmlUJY/Nouz8FwQ
mOVKD2GGRPWbmH1nJCOscAV6O+VXJtpNxqxQCfb7CKQeo3yXELXD4jeM8gHX1t/g
7mYVXIKzqFF3jGZV4BFVrOnVRmFgC9ZiA/9kshrnvEgqTkx4OQJxeRoccT5R/747
kk5UugEfIdGAHvKFJ8irrt2UTosq49K1+oaaFMHPpbeenu8Dii8=
=Hhd1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:09 MST