Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (12989)	6/9/2006 11:55:12 AM
From: grusum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78421

take a look at this guy. you don't have to buy any of his books, you can download it all for free and read at your convenience. the problem is that most people really get disturbed by his message. well.com here's what he says about his works.. "My teaching, if that is the word you want to use, has no copyright. You are free to reproduce, distribute, interpret, misinterpret, distort, garble, do what you like, even claim authorship, without my consent or the permission of anybody." ok, my last post on this stuff here.

To: LLCF who wrote (12989)	6/9/2006 1:24:56 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78421

I wonder if Godel's proof of internal inconsistency and incompleteness means that an expert witness cannot in fact answer any questions about the validity of his observations/conclusions because their validity cannot be answered unless by someone who has verified the science from another system, and that person's system has to be verified by something else etc.. so in fact since nothing is provable in toto, not everything is fundamentally provably false nor true entirely. This would mean that in any proposed system of truth from evidence there is always reasonable doubt.

To: LLCF who wrote (12989)	6/9/2006 4:27:48 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78421

DAK, I like this guy Bohm. But quoting him: "Bohm showed a deep concern for humankind and life in general, and was alarmed by what he considered an increasing imbalance of not only 'man' and nature, but among peoples, as well as people, themselves. Bohm: "So one begins to wonder what is going to happen to the human race. Technology keeps on advancing with greater and greater power, either for good or for destruction." And he goes on to ask: "What is the source of all this trouble? I'm saying that the source is basically in thought. Many people would think that such a statement is crazy, because thought is the one thing we have with which to solve our problems. That's part of our tradition. Yet it looks as if the thing we use to solve our problems with is the source of our problems. It's like going to the doctor and having him make you ill. In fact, in 20% of medical cases we do apparently have that going on. But in the case of thought, its far over 20%." Koan: He is right and wrong here in my opinion. He is right about the mind contributing (gestalting) the thought process, but from the above he sort of sidesteps the great gains the human species had made ala democracy, civil rights and the modern civilized approach to life. Present day humanity has never before been known by our species. To be honest I am also amazed we ever established democracy and civil liberties knowing what I know about our species-lol.