Macroscopic vs. Microscopic

There are times when it is appropriate to study something microscopically, especially when it comes to physical/material things as that is an easy way to understand its properties and how they behave.

However, not all things really qualify for this type of treatment, and it is a bit dishonest to put forth an argument with so limited of a scope that it literally becomes impossible to understand it at all.

To use an analogy, we could study a dog prone to violent outbursts, and make all sorts of hypotheses and theories that suggest dogs in general are just inherently violent - the "nature of the beast", if you will. However, when we zoom our focus outward and notice that someone has been ruthlessly poking at the dog with a stick, maybe that will add a little bit more understanding of the dog and our position may very well change.

It also does us no good to simply bunker down and hold firm in our own position and fire off charges at the other side when perhaps we are just as complicit in how things have come to pass and that we are no better.

This is something we all need to realize:



A possible solution:



Thank you for your time.

To use an analogy, we could study a dog prone to violent outbursts, and make all sorts of hypotheses and theories that suggest dogs in general are just inherently violent - the "nature of the beast", if you will. However, when we zoom our focus outward and notice that someone has been ruthlessly poking at the dog with a stick, maybe that will add a little bit more understanding of the dog and our position may very well change.

nyah this is more akin to "nature vs. nurture"
how something *can* change

miscroscopic vs. macroscopic is more akin to.. let's say; "as above, so below"
..this is more about how something is *fixed*

/slinks away
[edit]
/slinks back

^ see what i'm saying above (about something that can change opposed to something unchangeable)

It also does us no good to simply bunker down and hold firm in our own position and fire off charges at the other side

when/if you're right... you're right...
..that's something you don't *have* to change

..but knowing what's "right".. yeah, good luck there, if you find something out let me know


can you give me a good reason why that dog should have been poked with the stick?
this is what i'm talking about, something that can change as opposed to something unchangeable (such as morality) ...now it's apparent what i'm trying to get across - something that ought NOT to be changed (...when does it become "ok" to start poking a dog with a stick)

reply to post by UNIT76


I'm referring to the method of study and consciously ignoring all the data available by using one technique over another.

consciously ignoring

..does not compute

approaching a cliff edge, does one suspend knowledge of gravity in order to test a new theory?

i'll come back tomorrow for this one

reply to post by UNIT76


It really depends on your motives and if you have a hidden agenda to push.

I suspect you have no idea what prompted this rant, but that's ok, it's not required.

yuh huh, my powers only extend so far

reply to post by UNIT76


Well then share with the world your immense powers of observation - you know, contribute.