3
   

Physical Philosophy

 
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2012 09:54 am
@Cyracuz,
Yes, that's why Nietzsche was not a system builder. Like Walt Whitman he was not particularly concerned about contradicting himself. Consistency--the concern of "little minds"--was not a high value for him because--as I understand his project--it is no way to accurately describe reality.
I like your metaphor. The Catholic cathedral in Mexico City was built with the stones from the destroyed Aztec religious center (Teocalli). The implications are many, I'm sure.
0 Replies
 
Tifinden
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2012 12:19 pm
@Cyracuz,
You captured the essence of what I had said in an ergonomic manner.
0 Replies
 
Tifinden
 
  0  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2012 12:22 pm
@JLNobody,
He does not in the slightest manner reference this supposed "street philosophy." However, he references the omnipresent and dimeniuonsally applicable nature of the philosophy to which our minds are endeared. Like atemtping to define the essence of the wind or of time, revelatory aspects of the grand spectrum of our penultimate world, attemtping to partition philosophy into classified manners of thought is relatively futile-philosophy is all and it is inherent and a natural component of all matter recognizable to our cognitive minds-both physical and intellectual. It captures the axioms by which we, human, approach the next day, the next second, and the world itself.
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2012 03:40 pm
@Tifinden,
I think JL's take on what I wrote was pretty good.
That does not mean that your take on it is any less meaningful.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2012 03:57 pm
@Tifinden,
The standard model in particle physics allows for a concept of leptons having "point size" (less than 10^-8 size of atom). This is where your theoretically perfect physical sphere and perfect surface can be said be partially described by Euclidean mathematical model. Some philosophers (epistemologists) argue that all "knowledge" is framed by such analogies or paradigms, and their existential (ontological) status depends on the limits of their success in prediction and control.
Tifinden
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 May, 2012 10:41 am
@fresco,
This concept was one of my first assumptions- that the most minute of mathematical modesl would support the contact of the sphere and the surface upon which it rests. Additionally, I appreciate the analogous model you described, regarding worldly philosophy. Additionally, the axiomatic system of"'knowledge' by such analogies or paradigms", as you described, induces me to recall the theories of Descartes, whose entire intellectual philosophy and model of thought in pursueing dimensional knowledge seems to resemble your statements here.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Physics of the Biblical Flood - Discussion by gungasnake
Suggest forum, physics - Question by dalehileman
The nature of space and time - Question by shanemcd3
I don't understand how this car works. - Discussion by DrewDad
An Embarassment to Science - Discussion by Leadfoot
Gravitational waves Discovered ! - Discussion by Fil Albuquerque
BICEP and now LIGO discover gravity waves - Discussion by farmerman
Transient fields - Question by puzzledperson
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/24/2019 at 06:00:14