hence my biases against seeking perfect solutions most of the time. T

I’m an American Pragmatist, so truth is a wipply-wobbly-timey-wimey thing anyway. If it works, use it. Error-free situations are not expected, they’re more like happy accidents.
If you want an air tight logical proof, not likely you’ll find it in Philosophy. It’s like trying to find the subjective in the Sciences – it *can’t* exist in the sciences because it’s objective by its definition.

Thank you. I don’t play the sarcasm game by the way, if that was sarcastic.

By the way, the whole right brain/left brain thing is a bit of modern mythology. It’s the stuff of pop psychology not cogpsych.

I can step into your house and tell that you’re frustrated.
Emotions are a great clue for the contents of one’s house.
Are they truths? No, but they’re clues.
Then again, I found out recently that I tend towards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning rather than Philosophy standard, so perhaps that’ll help you take a step into my cottage.

Of course I won’t. But I’m not looking for perfection here. There’s such a thing as close enough. Zeno’s syllogism is a fun game but it’s as silly as people believing in infinities and such, just because math is broken in some areas.

I was being unfair. Allow me to explain my bias:
I tend towards an embodied cognition view. That may help. Our houses aren’t so different but the lighting is strange in my house.

Fair enough smile emoticon And you’re right, about pragmatism. I’m not crazy about it myself sometimes. But it leads to some easy to follow rules. If you can’t get through a wall, go over, under, through, walk away – in short, there’s a lot of solutions when at a dead end of a maze. So, it’s has its uses.

But within the confines of deductive philosophical (or is it inferential? I welcome corrections here) reasoning- yes, it’s a hard problem of philosophy. There’s a number, which is what makes them interesting.

Still though, I’m a programmer by nature / training for many years, so I always found a way to accomplish tasks, even if it required shimming in other unrelated programs to make something work, rather than having “elegant code.” So, call me a product of my experience I suppose smile emoticon – and hence my biases against seeking perfect solutions most of the time. The hamster’s need to eat as they spin around and around, sometimes smile emoticon

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


five − = 1

Leave a Reply