Are some categories (“whales as mammals”) more useful than others (“whales as fish”) in understanding the universe?
If we categorize many different kinds of phenomena as “religion”, we might arrive at “religion is universal - present in all human cultures”, and we might then seek brain/neural mechanisms that provide an “explanation”. Whereas another approach to categorization (e.g., Lthis phenomena is no more religion than philosophy is physics”) might lead to “religion is far from universal; many cultures exist/have existed with no religion”. We mi
“My soul as a computer programmer cries out against the idea of representing N particles with N^2 distances between them; it seems wasteful”
Given 3 non-collinear points on a plane, any other point is fixed by its distances from these three points; and similar results hold in higher dimensions. You need O(N) numbers, not O(N^2) numbers to describe N particles.
I have imagined that the key to scientific progress is to focus on problems that are “within reach”. If that is valid, not sure Harry has good reasons to think that solving death is within reach.
Three more links re: Gandhi
On the use of India’s armed forces:
http://thepartitionofindia.blogspot.com/2017/10/mahatma-gandhi-on-use-of-indian-armed.html
http://thepartitionofindia.blogspot.com/2017/10/mahatma-gandhi-on-use-of-indian-armed_23.html
On Hitler,
http://thepartitionofindia.blogspot.com/2017/08/gandhi-on-hitler.html
Actually Mahatma Gandhi was very much against cowardice, not against violence. The highest courage was to resist non-violently; but if you could not do that, Mahatma Gandhi wanted you to stand your ground. Regarding WW2, he would not have India fight the Empire’s war without Independence. Not after the experience of WW1.
https://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2013/10/broken-promises-parallel.html
Quote:
Indians lent their support enthusiastically in World War I to Great Britain, thinking that it would help them become equal partners in the British Empire. A
Agreed that the 9/11 hijackers see themselves as the heroes of their own story. But about “hating freedom”, they very likely thought that:
Western influence on their cultures, regarding women’s right to dress, drive, work etc., is destructive.
It is wrong that the legislatures can make laws that violate those given to them by the Prophet.
(Even the alleged moderate Imam Rauf of the Ground Zero Mosque proposes that a bench of religious scholars be instituted to review decisions of the US courts).
Christians and Jews must live within the limits prescribed
Various industry and government estimates tell us that Americans watch an unbelievable 8 hours of TV every day. Even if this a gross overestimate, what is the cost of a few days of lottery fantasy compared to that?
“In many cultures, ....it is important to understand that stories are not explanations. They are neither true nor false because they do not describe ‘factual’ events; they do not claim that they do either. “
Sayyid Qutb, who was a supplier of ideology for the terrorists who perpetrated 9/11, did see the US as evil for, among other things, the freedom of its women. (E.g., to quote Qutb via Wiki, he noted the “animal-like" mixing of the sexes (which "went on even in churches")). So “hate our freedom” has truth to it.
Isn’t that what comments in the code are for?