Originally posted by ottobot
Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by ottobot
yes, with math. Math is a language we invented as a representative process, to make analagous and predictive situations. However, it has its
limitations, and perhaps should not always be used because of its comparative limitations. See the definition above I referenced for holism. It's
only my opinion, of course, but I do think we rely on math far too often to express what isn't a matter of mathematics. It seeks to take the exact
surprise I am speaking of out of anything else.
Well, we will just have to agree to disagree.
If R + 3 + & can equal EON, then I feel like there is plenty of surprise to go around.
My point is that even though there are a set number of parts, we have no way of knowing what each part is made up of, how they combine, why they
combine, or how they form a completely new entity when combined.
You are saying that you do not believe we are made of parts because because there are some indefinable and unexplained phenomena associated with us as
beings. To you, we are whole only because we are whole.
Therefore, we are both right because we get the same result: Marvelous things can happen.edit on 2/7/2012 by ottobot because: (no reason
given)
Yes, that is some of what I am saying, but not all. I wouldn't call the above phenomena, necessarily, and I am not speaking just about us as beings.
I am also talking about other natural systems. I do believe that systems can be separated into the parts, but not only the recognition of the parts
is at work here. And since we may be limited in our abilities to perceive and recognize and therefore, know about these "parts," we cannot
necessarily replicate, disassemble and reassemble and predict behavior, causation or outcomes.
For example, on another thread I have been in a discussion with someone asserting that our consciousness is nothing more than a product of our
genetics, the hardware on which we run. I do not agree with this. For one, I find this an extreme oversimplification of something very complicated,
genetics, epigenetics and environment, and conclusions about all of this arrived at by studies and statistical information limited by the closed loop
of the math involved. I also think there is still much we do not know, nor have the perception at the moment to recognize, not quantitatively
express. This is just an example.
In a Holistic viewpoint, also included in the "guesswork" of our assumptions is the idea that you must know everything about the parts of the
system, not only have identified all the parts, but know the history and/or evolution of them, to judge them and their workings, and be able to take
the system apart, study, and put it back together and repeat every time the same result said system experienced.
But yes, largely, we do agree. Miraculous things can happen.
I do, however, believe we focus far too much on our created, literal language of math, as we are wrapped up in observable, tangible reality, while we
may lack knowlege of things because it is at this moment outside of our perceptive or quantitative abilities.
