Google search results for:
"thinking outside the box": 1,160,000
"thinking inside the box": 133, 000
"thinking without regard to the box at all": 0
------
The zero sum Google search is a good Friday afternoon quest, but presents an interesting epistemological problem. That is, by pointing out that an internet search for a specific phrase bears no results, aren't I in fact creating a result? That is, as soon as this is posted and as soon as Google discovers it, won't the results for "thinking without regard to the box at all" change from zero to one?
As with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, does the act of suggesting an idea does not exist thereby cause the idea to exist?
"thinking outside the box": 1,160,000
"thinking inside the box": 133, 000
"thinking without regard to the box at all": 0
------
The zero sum Google search is a good Friday afternoon quest, but presents an interesting epistemological problem. That is, by pointing out that an internet search for a specific phrase bears no results, aren't I in fact creating a result? That is, as soon as this is posted and as soon as Google discovers it, won't the results for "thinking without regard to the box at all" change from zero to one?
As with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, does the act of suggesting an idea does not exist thereby cause the idea to exist?
You, townblog reader, ARE NOW FREAKING OUT.
Drink a lot of water, think good thoughts, and maintain a peaceful vibe. If you've got some Allman Brothers records, you can go ahead and put 'em on. You should start coming down in about 8 hours.
Posts
2 comments:
"As with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, does the act of suggesting an idea does not exist thereby cause the idea to exist?"
Actually, prior to Heisenberg, there was a school of Aristilean logic that was based precisely on that theory. By the mere mentioning of something, anything, creates the existence of the chance it exists.
Now this does does not prove something does or does not exist. It establishes the abilty to constuct a proof that will establish "Theory X" is logically sound or unsound. In order to create a proof, one must make an assumption as to it's existence. You cannot assume the negative. You must provide the chance of the positive, and work to disprove, or, more accurately, create an unsound logically proof using the assumed existence as the Conclusion, and create the proof off a set of givens. Often times the Givens themselves must be created off of prior proofs.
In addition, while a proof may be sound for one set of givens, you must take into consideration all sets of givens, including those that are worded thusly "Some X are always Y" or "Most Y are sometimes Z". Now granted, these will make it more difficult to create a sound or unsound logically proof. However, if given enough "givens" (excuse my double usage of given, sometimes I cannot help myself), even if these givens are not absolutes, a Logically Proof can be constructed, and a sound or un-sound conclusion can be reached.
God, I love this stuff.
Hmm, yes. Quite right, quite right. And yet...
KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
Post a Comment