Natural order is a yang view

[Marblehead]

 

Actually, he says that Brian has got it all wrong, and makes a damn strong argument. It's a very good article, really.

Okay, the first thing I had to do was find out who Henry Gee is as I had never heard of him before. Analysis: He is qualified to speak.

 

And I will agree that his argument is valid although misplaced.

 

Valid in that what he said, disregarding his argument against Brian, is well established. Each species is unique and has its own capabilities and capacities.

 

Misplaced because when one is speaking of the evolution of man one does not discuss what tools a crow is capable of using.

 

So I suggest that his article was written out of jealousy (Brian is on TV and he is not) as well as to have an opportunity to promote his own book (which has little to do with Brian's TV program).

[soaring crane]

I'm just happy you clicked :-)

[Marblehead]

I'm just happy you clicked :-)

And now I am happy that you are happy.

[Rara]

 

Actually, he says that Brian has got it all wrong, and makes a damn strong argument. It's a very good article, really.

 

Just read it.

 

Very Taoist! Very good

[Rara]

And I will agree that his argument is valid although misplaced.

 

Valid in that what he said, disregarding his argument against Brian, is well established. Each species is unique and has its own capabilities and capacities.

 

Misplaced because when one is speaking of the evolution of man one does not discuss what tools a crow is capable of using.

 

Also very good!

[somatech]

I think this thread is suspiciously a Yang thread

[Marblehead]

I think this thread is suspiciously a Yang thread

Oh, but I disagree. Yang is chaos and Yin is order. There is balance.

Edited October 30, 2014 by Marblehead

[Owledge]

Oh, but I disagree. Yang is chaos and Yin is order. There is balance.

Order is patterns, conformity, structures and adaptation to it. It requires active effort and the rational mind as guide. Chaos is manifesting without a plan, without an urge, without an intention.

I would say an exact association cannot be made. Order and chaos both have yin and yang aspects. Ultimately, yin and yang are only themselves and don't equate to anything else. Just like shown in the taiji, you can only identify tendencies, but there are no absolute extremes.

And I'd say chaos tends towards yin and order towards yang. Just look at the relation between people's agendae of order and their means. The opposite tendencies would be order's contracting aspect and chaos' expanding aspect.

 

As a comparative example for the adverse tendency in yin/yang: Do you realize that the very capitalist strrategy of selling new or top notch products for especially high prices in order to be able to lower prices of lesser products for the masses is a socialist aspect?

Edited October 30, 2014 by Owledge

[Marblehead]

Well, I got more than I bargained for with my last post.

 

I agree that an association between yin/yang and chaos/order cannot fairly be made.

 

And I understand your opinion regarding yang equating to order.

 

But perhaps it can be said that chaos will result from too much order and that order will be called for because of too much chaos. There needs be balance, and importantly, harmony.

[somatech]

Oh, but I disagree. Yang is chaos and Yin is order. There is balance.

 

Lol. Yes. I was working with the premise of the argument and attempting to turn it back on itself for some ironic humour. Don't know if it really worked.

Edited November 1, 2014 by somatech

[somatech]

Order is patterns, conformity, structures and adaptation to it. It requires active effort and the rational mind as guide. Chaos is manifesting without a plan, without an urge, without an intention.

I would say an exact association cannot be made. Order and chaos both have yin and yang aspects. Ultimately, yin and yang are only themselves and don't equate to anything else. Just like shown in the taiji, you can only identify tendencies, but there are no absolute extremes.

And I'd say chaos tends towards yin and order towards yang. Just look at the relation between people's agendae of order and their means. The opposite tendencies would be order's contracting aspect and chaos' expanding aspect.

 

As a comparative example for the adverse tendency in yin/yang: Do you realize that the very capitalist strrategy of selling new or top notch products for especially high prices in order to be able to lower prices of lesser products for the masses is a socialist aspect?

 

I tend to think as order leaning towards Yang. But then I look at Vedic Goddess's that are considered to be the organising power of the universe - Saraswati is often said to be that functioning intelligence that makes the infinite number of relationships between two things spontaneously and perfectly co-exist with every other relationship, at every time/space point in reality. Thats sounds pretty orderly to me.

 

I can only agree that Yin and Yang are only themselves and don't equate to anything else, including fitting into human intellectual frameworks. I also wonder why we bother making claims about this stuff, as fun as it is.

[Marblehead]

Lol. Yes. I was working with the premise of the argument and attempting to turn it back on itself for some ironic humour. Don't know if it really worked.

Hehehe. Yes, it worked. I just forgot to start the post off with my normal "Hehehe".

[Marblehead]

I can only agree that Yin and Yang are only themselves and don't equate to anything else, including fitting into human intellectual frameworks. I also wonder why we bother making claims about this stuff, as fun as it is.

Yes, it is fun. What we think and say really doesn't matter all that much. But it is good to think. We have a brain, we might as well use it.

[Owledge]

I tend to think as order leaning towards Yang. But then I look at Vedic Goddess's that are considered to be the organising power of the universe - Saraswati is often said to be that functioning intelligence that makes the infinite number of relationships between two things spontaneously and perfectly co-exist with every other relationship, at every time/space point in reality. Thats sounds pretty orderly to me.

 

I can only agree that Yin and Yang are only themselves and don't equate to anything else, including fitting into human intellectual frameworks. I also wonder why we bother making claims about this stuff, as fun as it is.

Religious concepts involving God-symbology cannot be expected to be the ultima ratio of wisdom. Does it claim that it's a goddess because of yin? Are they even making that connection like in Taoism?

As I said, this might be because the people who made that symbology associate order with balance and/or harmony. It's like a yang mind coming up with a religious system that puts itself as the ideal center. This is exactly what I meant in the beginning that the idea of a "natural order or things" isn't order, it's balance, yet by using the word "order" it creates confusion in the mind. And that's why the masses are so favorable towards the law&order mentality that brings so much suffering to the world. They think order is good, it makes a pleasant life, so we need as much of it as we can. They see order as good and chaos as bad, thus any hint of chaos will be opposed.

The last thing the world needs right now is to "restore order". All the political upheaval lately exists BECAUSE they are still trying that. People (taken the population on average) need to learn to live with less order, then they can move towards balance first and in turn harmony.

[iain]

Hello folks,

I was wondering if you are offey with this familiar form?
It is a beautiful demonstration of the interrelation that life upon planet earth has with random chaos.

Edited November 1, 2014 by iain

[Marblehead]

Hello folks,

 

I was wondering if you are offey with this familiar form?

It is a beautiful demonstration of the interrelation that life upon planet earth has with random chaos.

 

Yes, I have some fern fronds out back at the pond area.

[iain]

Yes, I have some fern fronds out back at the pond area.

Did you know that they can be generated graphically, as in the picture above, by plotting random coin tosses through a simple set of rules or an algorithm?

 

Order meets chaos; yin meets yang.

[Marblehead]

Did you know that they can be generated graphically, as in the picture above, by plotting random coin tosses through a simple set of rules or an algorithm?

 

Order meets chaos; yin meets yang.

I haven't played with random generated graphics for a very long time. I wasn't aware that something like a fern frond could be generated though. It is amazing what computers can do with the help of the mind of man.

[iain]

Funnily enough; a computer is incapable of generating a truly random sequence even today, though a quantum machine maybe be capable of this, with a big "?" ...

This image will eventually emerge from a coin toss and a pen and paper plot; the computer helps to speed things up somewhat and if it is powerful enough a computer its best attempt at random will work. The randomness problem correlates to resolution; if your simulated random is detailed enough the pattern emerges.

[Owledge]

Funnily enough; a computer is incapable of generating a truly random sequence even today, though a quantum machine maybe be capable of this, with a big "?" ...

This image will eventually emerge from a coin toss and a pen and paper plot; the computer helps to speed things up somewhat and if it is powerful enough a computer its best attempt at random will work. The randomness problem correlates to resolution; if your simulated random is detailed enough the pattern emerges.

It amuses me when even professionals are working on things like "true RNG" while not having done the philosophical work about those ideas. They feel smart when talking about "pseudo-random", yet only to those who are impressed by fancy words. Those ideas are showing their lack of understanding.

There is only one type of random, the only thing that can differ is the quality, depending on the obscuration effort invested.

When used for a purpose, there is always an enabling structure in place to produce those 'random' results, and if that enabling structure, which represents an element of non-randomness, is what is regarded as making it pseudo-random, which very much seems to be the case, then it is by definition impossible to create a 'true random' number generator or such.

On the highest level, you can either see everything as random, or nothing, but this distiction is just the mind's folly.

 

So what could that fancy quantum technology do different? Enable an algorithm that brings up a different result under the same conditions? Impossible. The conditions are always different if it yields a different result. It seems what computer scientists are trying to achieve is making an algorithm that they themselves don't understand, so that they can believe in their idea of true randomness. But the creator of an idea cannot be inferior to the idea itself, so this is madness.

[iain]

So what could that fancy quantum technology do different?

A don't think it would do any thing differently, but I think its time frame would be rooted else where; no longer a vibrating crystal in our space-time frame of reference. It is debatable as to whether it is random but it would not be comparatively different from a perpetual coin toss in our time frame reference. Obviously you can't toss a coin in space, randomness is very dependant upon location and movement.

Enable an algorithm that brings up a different result under the same conditions?

No algorithm necessary to generate randomness if it is coming from the underlying system rather than being fabricated, if perhaps randomness be related to the perspective of a space time reference, such as that of our Earth's motion; then it is feasible that generated randomness would not show any comparative modal differences when compared to a physically generated random sequence, such as a coin toss.

Edited November 1, 2014 by iain

[Marblehead]

Back in the old Apple IIE days I did write a random number generator but it required a different input each time the program was run. I opted for the date input to begin the process as the program was never run more than once per month. But the computer itself, even though it was supposed to be able to do it, was not capable of true randomness.

[iain]

Computers run on a very linear ticker-tape ... . ... . . ...... . . . . .

[iain]

A fascinating subject; personally I like equate yin and yang to sky and earth, earth being femanin and sky masculine; Life being a fractal boundary in space and time on the border between the two.

The natural state of order or disorder depends upon where you reside and when.

[Marblehead]

Computers run on a very linear ticker-tape ... . ... . . ...... . . . . .

So does my brain.