The curiosity that “reality” doesn’t make sense as a concept (as it can’t be represented in the mind) becomes more sensible in natural language terms at least. You can then ask what makes reality work so well as a process. … Comments from a LinkedIn discussion group “UN call for revolutionary thinking [for] economic survival..6/24/12”
1. Struggling to get scientists to discuss natural self-organizing systems: 6/24/12
Jessie Henshaw @L – It could help to notice how you restated my saying “They [scientists] tend to go direct from data to models without studying [the] complex working processes the subject came from or operates with.” To me, your response displays the basic problem I’m describing.
I’ve spent years with large and small scientific communities trying to get them to let me demonstrate a way to study the instrumental processes of individual complex systems, helping expose how they develop and change. After 30 years of that, making steady advances all along myself… I still feel about as stumped as before about how to share them.
A sign of the problem is in how you restate my complaint, changing the subject. Your restatement of it was “her generalization that scientists in general leap from data to models without regard to systems”, saying that has not been your experience.
You changed the phrase “without studying [the] complex working processes the subject came from or operates with” to the phrase “without regard to systems”. That rephrasing shifts the subject from phenomena of nature (in their own form), to system models (as concepts for nature) defined within the researcher’s own framework of explanations. That’s my complaint!