home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsm!mls
- From: mls@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (mike.siemon)
- Subject: Re: Question of Theory of Everything (or Grand Unified theory)
- Organization: AT&T
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:13:27 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Sep9.011327.15194@cbnewsm.cb.att.com>
- Summary: adaptive nature of intelligence
- References: <1992Sep7.040445.19839@galois.mit.edu> <88251@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <88251@netnews.upenn.edu>, weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
- > In article <1992Sep8.023027.15883@nuscc.nus.sg>, matmcinn@nuscc (Mcinnes B T (Dr)) writes:
-
- > >Now: is it not truly astounding that the complexity of the universe
- > >is so precisely calibrated to the intelligence of homo sapiens?
-
- > I think Einstein had a famous quotation on just this point. Something
- > about the most incomprehensible thing about the universe being that it
- > is comprehensible.
-
- The "precision" is quite likely an illusion. If our brains, and the ways
- they use to tie our consicousnesses into the objects thereof, are products
- of a long process of adaptation, it is hardly surprising that *for our
- purposes* the adaptation provides a good makeshift of "comprehension" --
- whether or not our internal models have anything much to do with reality.
-
- Exactly how would we KNOW, for example, if our models were totally inade-
- quate beyond the range of what is admitted (on whatever random grounds)
- into the substratum of our model building? The stability of physical
- theories (i.e., that they seem at least to "keep on working") is certainly
- encouraging -- but it is hard (as Hume noted) to draw any serious conclus-
- ions from that.
-
- --
- Michael L. Siemon "I know of nothing -- I suspect
- not even death -- that is so fixed
- mls@usl.com in the present tense as love."
- standard disclaimer -- Jess Anderson
-