Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,872   Posts: 1,520,114   Online: 863
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 33 of 33
  1. #31
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,412
    Images
    2
    I agree... except in terms of technology, we're no different than we were eons ago. I believe that technology gives us the illusion that we are more advanced, and indeed we've formalized so much more, but our base instincts and faculties have remained the same. We're not smarter, but our technology and organized civilization is such that we are bombarded from birth. That effect is the only thing that makes us different from people a million years earlier.... save maybe a handful of negligibly advantageous mutations
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,224
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Yes.
    But's it's not that wrong at all to do so. Despite our optimistic view of ourselves, we have progressed very little since the earliest times we know of.
    It sounds like you think you're disagreeing with me, but I don't get why. I'm certainly not saying "we got better".

    But it's easier to see big patterns in How People Work when you're looking back on them from a few centuries later than it is in real time. So I don't have too much trouble believing that it took a while before anyone had the perspective to reify something that we'd recognise as "the scientific method", even though that person's predecessors had all the ingredients and were sort of doing the same thing.

    I also think Aristotle couldn't falsify a hypothesis if it bit him on his pompous posterior, but I'm prepared to admit that this may not be a purely objective opinion. :-)

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    It sounds like you think you're disagreeing with me, but I don't get why. I'm certainly not saying "we got better".
    I'm disagreeing with your historic perspective thing.
    To exagerate only a bit: 2000 years ago is like yesterday.

    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    I also think Aristotle couldn't falsify a hypothesis if it bit him on his pompous posterior, but I'm prepared to admit that this may not be a purely objective opinion. :-)
    Pompous? The man who wrote (amongst lots of other stuff) the Topics?
    The man who invented both the hypothesis, and the many ways to falsify just about anything?

    You must think of someone else.
    Or (switching from a disagreeing to a agreeing state of mind - don't know whether that would be more agreeable, but that's another matter): yes, that does sound very much like a purely objective opinion. (Or am i now disagreeing again? Hard, this...)

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin