4 ms·

Understanding is subjective. 'Shut up and calculate' is considered objective. The latter offers no insight or understanding and instead demonstrates how to mode

Understanding is subjective. 'Shut up and calculate' is considered objective. The latter offers no insight or understanding and instead demonstrates how to model the functions of the system under scrutiny. These two are provided by different faculties of the mind, and sensory perception of a physical reality is yet a third instance with reference to the one thing. If you have additional faculties of perception, you grasp the thing in additional ways. Should you be color blind, is paint superstition?

ben_w 5y ago
For the first two paragraphs, my answer is basically: Yes, and? For the case of paint: paint can be understood in both superstitious and non superstitious ways regardless of if you can or can’t see it, and whether it is or is not being understood superstitiously depends on the details of what one does or doesn’t know. I’ve read superstitious accounts of colour by people who can see it — “pink is for girls, blue is for boys”, which of bold or soft colours is better for a child’s education, does yellow encourage intellectual thought… Here’s something for you: is the use of blue-and-orange in action film posters backed by research that poster designers know about, or are they just cargo-culting one particular successful film’s poster? As with John Frum, this isn’t about the original, it’s about why everyone else is mimicking it: a blind or colourblind person doesn’t need to have a colour qualia to find out either way. I think your groups are too broadly encompassing. The division between superstition and scientific method is inside any given decision, not between entire beliefs or results, so you can’t just point to a specific belief or result and categorise it as either. (I’m not sure I was clear on that myself in the previous postings).
- ganzuul 5y ago
  If this is about how we factorize our categories then we can argue endlessly about what is what.

ben_w 5y ago

For the first two paragraphs, my answer is basically: Yes, and? For the case of paint: paint can be understood in both superstitious and non superstitious ways regardless of if you can or can’t see it, and whether it is or is not being understood superstitiously depends on the details of what one does or doesn’t know. I’ve read superstitious accounts of colour by people who can see it — “pink is for girls, blue is for boys”, which of bold or soft colours is better for a child’s education, does yellow encourage intellectual thought… Here’s something for you: is the use of blue-and-orange in action film posters backed by research that poster designers know about, or are they just cargo-culting one particular successful film’s poster? As with John Frum, this isn’t about the original, it’s about why everyone else is mimicking it: a blind or colourblind person doesn’t need to have a colour qualia to find out either way. I think your groups are too broadly encompassing. The division between superstition and scientific method is inside any given decision, not between entire beliefs or results, so you can’t just point to a specific belief or result and categorise it as either. (I’m not sure I was clear on that myself in the previous postings).

ganzuul 5y ago
If this is about how we factorize our categories then we can argue endlessly about what is what.