Jump to content

shape1369

Member
  • Posts

    543
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by shape1369

  1. ^Symbols- I was at a lecture last year about the limits of knowledge and this professor was using very simple logical proofs to elucidate his idea to the group, but this one girl kept attacking the validity of his method. While seemingly disjointed from the current conversation... What you were saying about asian languages preparing people better...right on. The girl couldn't concieve of one of his figures because she was so stuck on the meaning of it. I have been thinking about the problem of logic in english vs. other languages for a bit now. I think the difference lies in the implications of the language. Ideographic languages such as japanese use singular symbols(ha) to convey whole concepts while english is forced into a reductionist circle because of the nature of our language is expressed visually. Singular symbols put together in different configurations to express singular uncontextualized concepts.

     

    I have a meeting to go to about drinking... so ill finish this when i come back... but yeah, there are a couple people on this board im really interested in discussing this stuff in depth with.

  2. Ive got a test in my electrodynamics class tomorrow. Between that and my advanced calc class, I

    have about as much math as I can handle in my life right now. I spent an hour today listening to a

    professor derive the prime gradient of a normal vector to a cloud of charge exhibiting dipolar

    behavior yada yada yada. Only to find out (four pages of notes later) that I can treat the entire

    situation like a surface charge distribution issue (much easier). The only reprieve I have from

    this life of math is philosophy of science classes... this semester is intense...

     

     

     

     

    edit for punctuation...

  3. milton or heavylox, have either of you read much about logical positivism, or weittgenstein? I am in a philosophy of science class right now and we are focusing mostly around that stuff. I have been understanding a lot more of post modernism now because of reading this stuff. Lox is right about reading about the modern period stuff first. A lot ofo the main ideas in P.M. can be seen starting to be formed in positivist writings. From what I have been understanding of things, the positivists hit a wall in philosophy, trying to decide what could ultimately be figured out by using it. Eventually they decided that there are only certain ways one can say a truth. Through examination of meaning one can figure out the limits of truth. Also that most of what we say is meaningless gibberish. The positivists died a bad death once people realized that by virtue of their own philosophy, it was pointless. But, you can see where some of the nhilistic concepts of post modernism emerge from. Also a lot of it was started by the realization of the disparity between observation, observational language and regular language.

     

    The implications for empericism is pretty interesting though. Regardless of what truth one might find through emperical data, making sense of it becomes a moot point once you try to transfer it from the observational language into regular language. As a physics student, this goes to the heart of me.

     

    As far as your original question about whether or not anyone ascribes to Post modernist ideals, I'd say I sorta do. I've been moving more towards it though from all these readings from class.

     

    I need to take a logic class, but I heard a really good lecture last year about the limits of knowledge from this visiting proffesor.

     

     

     

     

    edit cus to say I just realized most of what I said was covered in some form or another. But either way, any of you guys do any philosophy of science stuff?

  4. source

     

    Celebrity boxing did monster rating numbers a few years ago. It now appears a proposed Joe

    Rogan vs Wesley Snipes fight could do the same.

     

    There was buzz of this rumor on several forums today and MMAWeekly.com has had this confirmed

    in the past hour. MMAWeekly Radio Host Frank Trigg talked briefly with Joe Rogan this afternoon to see if

    there was any truth to the rumor.

     

    "It's 100% true..." Rogan told Trigg via the telephone. "I want the fight and now it's up to Wesley Snipes

    to accept." Snipes is a black belt in tae kwon doe and has trained in martial arts for years studying Karate,

    Kung Fu and Capoeira.

     

    Rogan was a four-time state Tae kwon do champion before pursuing a career in show business. Rogan earned

    a black belt at 15 after just two years of training. At 19 he won the US Open Tae Kwon Do Championship, and

    later as a lightweight champion went on to beat both the middle and heavyweight title-holders to obtain the

    Grand Championship.Rogan also trains regularly with submission specialist Eddie Bravo.

  5. I heard this interview of him recently, where he goes off on like a ten minute rant about the virtues of DMT. It was hilarious.

     

    Aparently during the filming of the man show while he was there they just tripped constantly... funny dude.

  6. I just wanna say that tequila is a great thing. I mean who doesn't dig a six dollar hip to keep you warm

    in your winter travels. Speaking of the cold. Fuck the cold. I am used to three weeks of triple digit weather

    and now I'm seein snow on the ground for months on in? Tha fuck is that about.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    drunk. discuss.

  7. You dont happen to have a copy (newperhaps?) of ableton live do you? Or anyone for that matter?

     

     

    ps... (drunk)yeah for weekends starting on friday. and for you tube.

×
×
  • Create New...