Theos-Talk Archives (December 2004 Message tt00254)

Bart Lidofsky <bartl@sprynet.com> wrote:

Cass Silva wrote:
> ISN'T PRAGMATISM (COMMON SENSE) THE SAME THING AS KNOWLEDGE (ONE IS
> THE WORKING MAN'S THE OTHER IS THE ACADEMICS) ? SORRY, BUT I DONT
> UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN BY "SCIENCE TAKES OFF WHEN MATHEMATICS CAN
> BE APPLIED. MATHEMATICS, IN THIS CASE, SHOWS THE INCREASED PROFIT
> MARGIN WHICH WOULD DRIVE THE SHARES UPWARD AT THE RISK OF PUBLIC
> HEALTH.IF YOU CAN INCREASE, BY 83%WITHOUT THE USE OF FERTILIZER THEN
> YOU WILL BE EXPANDING INTO NEW KNOWLEDGE. NO?

Well, you totally garbled up what I said. The key, in science, is that 
when predictions are general, they are of limited use. When predictions 
are precise, then further knowledge can be gained by application of the 
principles involved.



HPB said, figuratively, these are the precise facts. Examine and test them if you want to gain further knowledge of the universe of which you are a part.

OK, WHEN HAVE SCIENTIFIC PREDICTIONS BEEN PRECISE? The Big Bang, Quantum Mechanics cannot reconcile with Relativity Mechanics, but all new theories are based upon trying to reconcile the two. But I take your point, when predictions (guesses) are precise, it is the only starting point.



> AGREE, BUT ELECTRICITY DOES FLOW THROUGH WIRES (MY LIGHT SWITCH) AND
> WATER FLOWS THROUGH PIPES (MY DUNNY). I SUPPOSE A NATIVE IN THE
> AMAZON WOULD HAVE NO CONCEPT OF ELECTRICITY OR PIPED WATER, BUT THEN
> THERE REALITY DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. IF THEY CAME TO TOWN, AND WENT
> BACK TO THE VILLAGE WITH THIS NEW KNOWLEDGE, THE TRIBE WOULD THINK HE
> HAD GONE LOCO AND WOULDNT BELIEVE HIM ANYWAY.

Exactly. Consider how H. P. Blavatsky was treated.

Yep I know, maybe it is up to "others" to prove that she was not the village idiot.

Cass

Bart




Yahoo! Groups Links











---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]