The Scientific Method # 7

My work :

Hi,

ALL RIGHT, it took me one night to see why your second arguments about the
map And the map maker sounds so plausible even though I know it is crap. But
I think I finally got it.

So here goes.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.You believe maps are not independent of territory. Perfectly agree, 100%.
But you also seem to suugest that territory is not independent of maps. It
is this backward mapping from concepts to reality that I object to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You misunderstood me about the two way mapping. What I meant was that if I
Understood a map, I could picture the territory by using it. Also if I was
actually Standing in that territory, I would be able to visualize what part
of THAT PARTICULAR MAP it is. The territory is definitely completely
independent of the map. It Would exist independent of the existence of any
map.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
2. you believe maps are true representation of territory.
I contest this. Maps are just a perspective of the map-maker about the
territory. If map maker changes, so does the map
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now this is what was bugging me. What you are saying is true.
But here you are being inconsistent with your own initial problem statement,
viz, the ability of science to help explain phenomena.

If the map maker changes, so does the map. Correct. But it still remains a
map.
Situation being analogous to multiple scientific theories to explain a
single phenomenon, One or more of which may be fully or partioally correct.

What you ORIGINALLY said that is there a way of doing this without maps at
all. You wanted something which would put you yourself IN the territory,
instead of you having to infer the territory from the map.

Change the map maker as many times as you will, you still need a map.

Maps are representations their makers perspective on the teriitory??? As
both you and I agree, The territory is a fact. It does not brook any
perspective on it. All you can do is choose HOW to represent this fact. The
map maker has to present his Key to the map in advance. He may be Somewhat
incorrect. Some road may be longer or shorter than what it appears to be in
the map.Then the maker has to make the effort of corrcting his map as soon
as such a flaw is found.

What I mean to say is:
You may find faults with a map or a map maker, but you can not fault the
CONCEPT OF DRAWING MAPS To represet territory. The only way for you to
actually BE IN THE TERRITORY to use your mind to Understand a map.

What you are saying about locality maps is bullshit. I don't need a map of
my locality Because I already have it in my head. And the map in my head has
much more detail than Would be found in a usual map, but it's a map a map
nonetheless.
Everytime I take a left
from the paan waala to reach the playground I am referring that map
subconsciously.

But I will need that locality map if you want to know what is the cumulative
length of all the roads in my colony. It is requied for quantitative
measure.

Similarly, what suport tools do you want to do away with? Since you are very
comfortable with English can you do away with the grammar or punctuation???
If you are very worried about Delta T Then allow me to remind you that as
far as understanding the territory of natural phenomena goes You don't need
that abstraction. It comes into the map only when you try to obtain a
quantitative measure of phenomena. It is like scale of the map, not required
if you want only a general layout Of the territory but required if you want
to measure it.

I hope THAT has killed your little unscientific rebellion

Kis~