[FRIAM] Hywel's anti-representationalism

[Frank Wimberly]

Slight clarification.  Hywel said, "The number one does not exist."  I
think he was talking about measurement error and that no physical object is
exactly one meter long.  That's when I asked him how many mothers he had.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:59 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Such are the joys of dualism!
>
>  n
>
> Nick Thompson
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of jon zingale
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 5:24 PM
> To: friam at redfish.com
> Subject: [FRIAM] Hywel's anti-representationalism
>
> From time to time, I find myself reflecting on the wisdom of my old friend
> Hywel, and this time in particular, on the anti-representational nature of
> his epistemology. Hywel was well known for his aphorisms and most famously
> the declaration that:
>
> "Mathematics is fine, but it is better to know what you are doing".
>
> Occasionally, I would hear this as a staunch refutation of math envy. Upon
> more gracious reflection it occurs to me that there is much to be gained
> from substituting, in the aphorism, "Mathematics" for "Representation".
> Perhaps, even better would be the declaration that:
>
> "Representation is fine, but it is better to know directly".
>
> Hywel would often decry the existence of numbers, to which Frank would
> playfully reply, "Hywel, how many mothers do you have"? Hywel's response
> was
> a tacit smile, his wisdom would need to wait for a more amenable moment.
>
> Hywel's thought was radically empirical. The *world* itself was the thing
> to
> know and everything else an, often convenient, illusion. To proceed with
> the
> discussion, granting mothers, was to already concede a denotational
> worldview that was not his own.
>
> It is perhaps more insightful to reflect on his views on non-units.
> Hywelian
> epistemology admits no two things the *same*. To discuss neutrinos with
> him,
> the area of his expertise, was to discuss the experiments themselves, the
> blips of particle detectors, and the tubs of baby oil. Relations always
> between direct perceptions. To ask him about the exchangeability of protons
> was to have a discussion about particle decay. All symmetries, illusory.
>
> While representationalists find themselves in paradox pondering the source,
> whence objects come? Hywel's epistemology finds no such concern and
> continues to find purchase out there among the stars.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210324/a659b790/attachment.html>