OK. So that was the straw man you wanted to introduce here then. I've said a million times that the standard sociological story is that a social syste...
Rather it illustrates the contextuality of causation, the falseness of the presumptions of local realism. Your conventional notion of causality was al...
The obvious answer is that “you” are a developing process, an enduring structure. Not a thing, but a historically conditioned continuity. So is a proc...
Can’t offer you any particular book. But I well remember reading a history of Greek philosophy and realising how the standard story was told dialectic...
You queried the ball being at absolute rest. We can presume for the sake of the thought experiment it is in an inertial frame. So that would be a reas...
So apparently you agree that this inflated notion of having to make fiat-like goals to rule your own life is merely a modern socially constructed “fre...
Yeah, it is not that I’m arguing that regular cause and effect explanations are wrong. They are useful descriptions of how things generally are in a w...
If things can converge, then they can diverge. In one direction, the ultraviolet catastrophe. In the other, its matching infrared catastrophe. So in t...
Nope. I keep shifting the goal posts from atomism to holism. You keep trying to shift them back. But you need to then provide your account for how we ...
I call it you continuing to frame the situation atomistically and thinking you've said something worthwhile. Social construction is about the informat...
Social communities are smaller than the biological species. And "we" are the product of multiple levels of community. So let's not be simplistic. You ...
Maybe your mistake is to misunderstand the level at which language-based thinking, choosing and willing finds its natural meaning. You presume it is a...
The causality works the other way round. Life and mind rely on the functional trick of getting an informational grip on the material flows of the worl...
It is an inertial frame. And I’m not claiming that there is no accelerating force. I argue that the necessary force ought to be considered generic rat...
The modal distinctions I made were narratively different. Two would be general rather than particular. God would be fictional rather than factual. I w...
I think you are just being asked to justify your sweeping statements on the issue. You said sensations weren't meaningful. That would startle most psy...
Conceptions. Habits of sign. "God" and "two" exist as words in a language. And as such, they mediate some pragmatic conceptual relation we might have ...
...or demonstrably useful? (Again, is there a good reason to debate realism vs idealism for the billionth time when you have pragmatism as the better ...
What was your purpose then? (Pretty clearly, it was to suggest there might be a "dilemma" worth discussing. So given the familiarity of this debate, w...
I would instead say that to arrive at the classical situation, you would have to keep adding classical constraints. My argument is that indeterminism ...
I didn't quite complete this thought. As I am trying to make plain, my own interest here would be in the question of cosmic creation - the causality o...
Can you find a use for them? Is there a meaning beyond that use? The answer is the usual pragmatic one. Show that there is any actual mystery here. If...
Reflecting on things further, we do seem to wind up with the issue that there always needs to be some kind of probabilistic tunnelling process for the...
Yeah, it was my mistake to link to that paper for sure. I should have just left it at the gif I was taking. But still, Norton's dome is also its own i...
There is no need to worry about trying to fix Newton's laws if you just accept them as effective descriptions. They are how reality would work in the ...
The metaphysical reality of time reversal scenario's would also be in question here. If classical reality is actually the product of maximally constra...
Two different questions are being confused here. The OP was not intended to be about Norton's dome and its claims of Newtonian indeterminism due to a ...
Did you have any thoughts about a clearer account of Norton’s set up? Comments suggest to me that the cause of the sudden spontaneous motion is a conc...
Yeah. I think this is the next interesting case to dig into. Another slant on the OP would be the more standard example of a phase transition where a ...
This would be missing the point of the thought experiment. We can take it for granted the ball bearing is actually at rest on the apex in perfectly ba...
I would say you are missing the point. I am discussing how we might view the metaphysics of accidents - spontaneous or random events. On one view ther...
My question was about a poised situation and how we think about its symmetry breaking. It seems a problem that we need a first cause to actually pop u...
I see now what you mean. It was a mistake to link to that paper as Norton’s dome is a special case. Do you buy his story? I don’t get where his sudden...
But that is the easy presumption that is under attack here. Most people probably do find no reason to even question the possibility of being able to e...
But that relies on the ball starting on a slope, not on the flat. It is only infinitesimally close to the apex and so also infinitesimally inclined to...
Yes, but this would be a case of innumerable accidents as you say. The "push" advocates would still reply that there would be one last event that fina...
How so? If the ball has mass, it has inertia. A push is required to set it moving. Of course, it the ball is already "in motion", then that accelerati...
But here you seem to both say the right answer doesn't really matter, and yet also the right answer is that there will be some particular triggering c...
I was just citing Einstein there. I think he knew what he was talking about. It is basic to pragmatism that you could say absolutely anything about th...
Logic arises quite naturally out of getting into the habit of imagining nature organised like a machine. So as soon as humans were building huts with ...
And so you dumbly repeat something that I never said? I said classical physics might give us one model of causality. QM might give us another. And I w...
In what way am I failing to distinguish between model and world by drawing close attention to the mediating role played by "the report"? The sign (or ...
Maybe you still just fail to understand pragmatism then? How could I be conflating the model with the reality when I am talking about our models of re...
QM undermines classical causality. QM puts forward its own causal story. Experiment determines which story we are inclined to believe. It's really sim...
Comments