jbml thln_006 (Martin) a curious feature
OF PHYSICAL THEORY IS THAT MANY BASIC RESULTS CAN BE FOUND BY APPARENTLY UNRELATED METHODS OR ARGUMENTS.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE SOUNDS PRODUCED BY A MUSICAL INSTRUMENT CAN BE DESCRIBED BY SOLVING THE EQUATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH A DETAILED MODEL OF VIBRATIONS ON A STRING OR IN A HOLLOW CAVITY, AND THE SAME RESULT IS OBTAINED BY NAIVELY MULTIPLYING & DIVIDING THE PHYSICAL PARAMETERS AVAILABLE IN THE PROBLEM UNTIL A QUANTITY EMERGES THAT REPRESENTS PITCH.
FOR SOME, THIS CONFLUENCE OF APPROACHES ~ MANY PATHS TO THE BUDDHA, ONE MIGHT BE TEMPTED TO SAY ~ IS EVIDENCE OF AN UNDERLYING HOLISTIC REALITY THAT UNIFIES APPARENTLY DISTINCT METHODS AS CONNECTED FACETS OF A DEEPER THEORY.
ON THE OTHER HAND, CAREFUL SCIENTISTS MUST ALSO CONSIDER THAT SUCH COINCIDENCE MAY POSSIBLY BE THE TELL-TALE SIGN OF SELF-REFERENTIAL AND RIGGED (OR CONSPIRATORIAL) CIRCULARITY.
So, for example, when we find that our interpretation of history makes equal sense going forward & backward, we must ask ourselves whether this agreement is a check on our thinking ~ like adding up a restaurant bill in reverse order ~ or have we engineered a universe in which nothing can contradict our prejudices.
These thoughts come to mind as I consider that the questions you ask do follow naturally from the previous section, & yet invite me to close this part of our discussion on precisely the path I am predisposed to follow. It is possible, Jonathan, that your law professors have taught you well in the art of the leading question? Have years of teaching taught me to treat questions as just another opportunity to continue making my original point? Or is this convergence part of what we call language.
Asih, man, 80 jaar
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
vorige
volgende