From: Tony Hollick (anduril@cix.compulink.co.uk)
Date: Thu Aug 06 1998 - 12:03:20 MDT
Kathryn Aegis wrote:
> This may be a function of the manner in which the English language is used
> on my side of the Atlantic--North Americans tend to use the word 'concept'
> to indicate a broader idea rather than a concrete manifestation. Can
> someone clarify this?
A good maxim (due to Karl Popper) is that the value of any discussion
is inversely proportional to the time spent discussing the meaning of
words. >:-}
Kathryn goes on to quote two 'example' questions from Nick Bostrom:
>>
>>TRANSHUMANIST CONCEPTS
>>
>>What is nanotechnology?
>>
>>What is superintelligence?
>>
All 'What is?' questions are flawed by their essentialist framing of
the question. The implication is the Platonic one, that there is an
underlying pure concept which it is our job to define. The best you
can end up with is a sort of glossary.
Whereas a nominalist approach (that discourse is conventional) would
point out that good definitions (especially scientific definitions)
read 'from right to left': thus:
'Nanotechnology' is the scientists' effort to answer the question "What
shall we call a branch of science and technology addressing the design
and construction of tiny (even molecular-level) machines?" instead of
asking 'What is nanotechnology?" 'Nanotechnology ' is shorthand for
the longer definition. That's all.
Those of us who are used to thinking of scientific advance in terms of
hypothetico-deductive problem-solving would present the _interesting_
questions thusly:
"What problem(s) are we trying to solve here?"
============================================
where the problem-solving iteration is:
p1 --> th --> dp --> ee --> p2
whereby p1 is the initial problem; th is a testable hypothesis; dp is the
deduction of testable propositions; ee is error-elimination via (inter
alia) logical evaluation and real-world testing; and p2 is the
(hopefully) smaller resulting problem.
So an FAQ which has an initial heading describing the
problem-situations which chiefly concern extropians (i.e.
forward-looking and forward-thinking people), followed by a
presentation of hypothetical solutions, with a discussion of some of
the possible difficulties, would be most useful.
The document could then be enhanced by a Neuro-Linguistic Programming
style re-write, to give it added focus, zip and impact.
/ /\ \
--*--<Tony>--*--
Tony Hollick, LightSmith
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/la-agora (LA-Agora Conference)
http://www.agora.demon.co.uk (Agora Home Page, Rainbow Bridge Foundation)
http://www.nwb.net/nwc (NorthWest Coalition Against Malicious Harrassment)
------------------- * * * * * ---------------
| Anduril@CIX.compulink.co.uk * http://www.agora.demon.co.uk |
- <*> --------------------------* * * *-------------------------- <*> -
| Rainbow Bridge Foundation * * * Centre for Liberal Studies |
- <*> --------------------------* * * *-------------------------- <*> -
| 4 Grayling House, Canford Rd: * Bristol BS9 3NU Tel: 9098918 |
"America's Mission is to Lead the World to Paradise"
Motto: FIRST EARTH BATTALION FOUNDATION
------------------- * * * * * ---------------
<EOT>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:25 MST