Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,923 Year: 4,180/9,624 Month: 1,051/974 Week: 10/368 Day: 10/11 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Ambiguity-uncertainty-vagueness the key to resistance against the idea of evolution?
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 120 of 143 (251752)
10-14-2005 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by RAZD
10-13-2005 11:15 PM


Validity?
To me, the measure of the validity of the world views is the level of information that has to be denied to maintain it: the higher the level of denial needed the lower the validity.
Maybe "utility" instead of "validity" and I could agree. But otherwise, this seems not only totally arbitrary, but totally wrong.
I think a person's world view should be judged soley on it's ability to allow them to work with others. Anything beyond that... who cares?
Can you give any justification for using "validity" here?
Ben
P.S. Remember, you're not using "world view" to mean just an understanding of this world, but you're using "world view" to mean the total sum of a person's faith, beliefs, entire mental experience PLUS their view of how the world works. Just thought I should mention it in case somebody reads this without reading your original post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by RAZD, posted 10-13-2005 11:15 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2005 2:30 PM Ben! has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 127 of 143 (251792)
10-14-2005 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by RAZD
10-14-2005 2:30 PM


Re: Validity? or Utility
okay, I see your point -- some aspects of some world views are not open to being validated (as I had mentioned as well), so yes, utility would be a better word.
OK, cool.
it implies more of a usefulness in mapping new information between {world view} and {unknowable real world}
I completely disagree. Fundamentally disagree. And... I will ignore the comment, because I find that discussion much less interesting than the one we're talking about. We can take this discussion elsewhere, if necessary. (hoping it's not necessary)
For myself I care about the utility of my world view, and expect no less of others.
Why? I totally don't have this expectation, but I believe many do. Would you be so kind as to elaborate? I don't see the necessity of this at all; but I do think it's a huge stumbling point.
(just realized, ... maybe this is due to your the thought behind your "mapping" statement above. Maybe we have to discuss it after all? awww.. )
Furthermore... the way I was using utility above is ... in a global, society-level way. I do think that most people choose world views that are useful for themselves. It may explain experiences that they, and they alone, had. These experiences definitely include feelings and the like. A world view that is not "useful" in the "cultural" or "interpersonal" way I mentioned above still may turn out to be the most "useful" world view for that individual.
Ultimately it comes down to interactions, but our interactions are not only with other people.
Now I'm lost again Are you talking about how the earth really is like one organism, and that interaction is not just with people, but with all things? Or are you talking about something else?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2005 2:30 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2005 4:55 PM Ben! has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1429 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 137 of 143 (251831)
10-14-2005 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by RAZD
10-14-2005 4:55 PM


Re: Validity? or Utility
Fair enough. I'm satisfied enough to leave things as they are.
Ben
P.S. I should have a first email to you on your column today sometime.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2005 4:55 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2005 5:01 PM Ben! has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024