Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #103569 > unrolled thread

[Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-02-27 20:37 +1100
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-27 09:50 +0000
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-02-27 14:06 -0800
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Jason Friedman <jsf80238@gmail.com> - 2016-02-27 17:00 -0700
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 11:21 -0500
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:47 -0700
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-03-01 03:56 +1100
      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:08 -0800
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-03-01 04:33 +1100
          Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:54 -0800
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 17:40 -0500
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-29 23:29 +0000
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Joel Goldstick <joel.goldstick@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 18:33 -0500
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-02 04:05 +1100
          Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 09:02 -0800
            Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-03 13:27 +1100
              Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 13:35 +1100
                Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-03-03 17:21 +0000
                  Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 11:03 -0700
                    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-03-03 20:20 +0000
                      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 13:33 -0700
                      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception William Ray Wing <wrw@mac.com> - 2016-03-03 18:02 -0500
                        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-03-04 14:05 +0000
                      [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-04 11:04 +1100
                        Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 10:19 +0000
                          Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-03-04 12:38 +0200
                            Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-03-04 13:10 +0000
                            Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 17:35 +0000
                              Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] André Roberge <andre.roberge@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:12 -0800
                              Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses   MentalHealthError exception] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-03-05 15:51 +1300
                                Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 14:13 +1100
                                  Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-03-05 10:31 +0200
                                Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 13:11 +0000
                                  Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 16:38 +0100
                                Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception] Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2016-03-05 10:15 -0500
                                  Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 16:46 +0100
                                    Re: Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2016-03-05 12:36 -0500
                                    Re: Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-06 12:16 -0500
                                    Re: Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 09:21 -0500
                          Re: [Still off-topic] Physics Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-06 16:36 +1100
                      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError   exception Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-03-04 19:34 +1300
                        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError   exception Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-03-04 08:52 +0200
              Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 19:57 -0800
                Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 23:44 -0700
                Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-04 02:50 +1100
                Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-03-03 16:21 +0000
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2016-03-03 08:23 +0100
      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-29 16:35 -0800
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-02-29 16:54 -0800
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 17:36 -0500
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 17:38 -0500
      Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-01 23:13 +1100
        Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de> - 2016-03-01 17:49 +0100
    Re: [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception "Mario R. Osorio" <nimbiotics@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 20:11 -0800
    Re: Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2016-03-06 16:46 -0500
    Re: Photon mass (was: [Still off-top] Physics) Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 17:51 -0500

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#103569 — [Off-topic] Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception

The author of Requests, Kenneth Reitz, discusses his recent recovery from a
MentalHealthError exception.

http://www.kennethreitz.org/essays/mentalhealtherror-an-exception-occurred

Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
to read.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#103573

On 27/02/2016 09:37, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> The author of Requests, Kenneth Reitz, discusses his recent recovery from a
> MentalHealthError exception.
>
> http://www.kennethreitz.org/essays/mentalhealtherror-an-exception-occurred
>
> Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
> to read.
>

Thanks for the link even if it did touch an extremely raw nerve.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103610

On 02/27/2016 01:37 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
> to read.

Thanks to you and Kenneth for sharing that.

--
~Ethan~

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103612

Yes, thank you for sharing.

Stories from people we know, or know of, leads to normalization:
mental illness is a routine illness like Type I diabetes or
appendicitis.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
> The author of Requests, Kenneth Reitz, discusses his recent recovery from a
> MentalHealthError exception.
>
> http://www.kennethreitz.org/essays/mentalhealtherror-an-exception-occurred
>
> Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
> to read.
>
>
>
> --
> Steven
>
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103730

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
> The author of Requests, Kenneth Reitz, discusses his recent recovery from a
> MentalHealthError exception.
>
> http://www.kennethreitz.org/essays/mentalhealtherror-an-exception-occurred
>
> Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
> to read.

I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had learned
away from him and turn him back into what he was before.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103733

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> The author of Requests, Kenneth Reitz, discusses his recent recovery from a
>> MentalHealthError exception.
>>
>> http://www.kennethreitz.org/essays/mentalhealtherror-an-exception-occurred
>>
>> Although the connection to Python is only quite slim, I found it fascinating
>> to read.
>
> I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
> don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had learned
> away from him and turn him back into what he was before.

"All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103734

Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
> > don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
> > learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
>
> "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?

Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
say that one has “learned” it.

Also, I don't see how anyone “took away” those experiences. He wrote an
article describing them and clearly still retains those experiences as
memories to recall as he wishes.

When someone describes the ill effects their mental illness produced, I
find it rather condescending for an observer to express regret that
the person no longer experiences those ill effects.

-- 
 \           “We have clumsy, sputtering, inefficient brains…. It is a |
  `\     *struggle* to be rational and objective, and failures are not |
_o__) evidence for an alternative reality.” —Paul Z. Myers, 2010-10-14 |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103735

On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Ian Kelly  writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
> > > I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
> > > don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
> > > learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
> >
> > "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
> 
> Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
> say that one has "learned" it.

And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?

Niels Bohr random quote:
If anybody says he can think about quantum physics without getting giddy, that
only shows he has not understood the first thing about them.

Some more such: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/n/niels_bohr.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103740

Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Ian Kelly  writes:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
> > > > I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
> > > > don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
> > > > learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
> > >
> > > "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
> > 
> > Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
> > say that one has "learned" it.
>
> And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?

A nice academic question. Not appropriate when we're discussing a real
person's psychotic episodes. Neither you nor I are experts in whether an
experience is psychosis, and the person already has an expert diagnosis.

So please don't de-rail into the weeds of second-guessing an expert in
mental health. Unless you know the person's mental health better than
their doctor (and you do not), don't second-guess the diagnosis they
received.

-- 
 \          “When [science] permits us to see the far side of some new |
  `\      horizon, we remember those who prepared the way – seeing for |
_o__)                          them also.” —Carl Sagan, _Cosmos_, 1980 |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103745

On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 11:04:20 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Rustom Mody writes:
> 
> > On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > Ian Kelly  writes:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
> > > > > I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
> > > > > don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
> > > > > learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
> > > >
> > > > "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
> > > 
> > > Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
> > > say that one has "learned" it.
> >
> > And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?
> 
> A nice academic question. Not appropriate when we're discussing a real
> person's psychotic episodes. Neither you nor I are experts in whether an
> experience is psychosis, and the person already has an expert diagnosis.
> 
> So please don't de-rail into the weeds of second-guessing an expert in
> mental health. Unless you know the person's mental health better than
> their doctor (and you do not), don't second-guess the diagnosis they
> received.

No need to second guess

Article's last line:

Avoid falling in love with hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional beings.

IOW Larry makes an important point

The fact that he claims to be better now than in that period is more
significant than the medical diagnoses

It neglects the possibility that these are not the only two possibilities

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103764

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
>> > Ian Kelly  writes:
>> >
>> > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
>> > > > I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
>> > > > don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
>> > > > learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
>> > >
>> > > "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
>> >
>> > Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
>> > say that one has "learned" it.
>>
>> And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?
>
> A nice academic question. Not appropriate when we're discussing a real
> person's psychotic episodes. Neither you nor I are experts in whether an
> experience is psychosis, and the person already has an expert diagnosis.
>
> So please don't de-rail into the weeds of second-guessing an expert in
> mental health. Unless you know the person's mental health better than
> their doctor (and you do not), don't second-guess the diagnosis they
> received.

I think for the most part, the mental health industry is most
interested in pushing drugs and forcing people into some status quo.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103767

On 29/02/2016 22:40, Larry Martell wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>> Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
>>>> Ian Kelly  writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
>>>>>> I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
>>>>>> don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
>>>>>> learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
>>>>>
>>>>> "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
>>>>
>>>> Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
>>>> say that one has "learned" it.
>>>
>>> And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?
>>
>> A nice academic question. Not appropriate when we're discussing a real
>> person's psychotic episodes. Neither you nor I are experts in whether an
>> experience is psychosis, and the person already has an expert diagnosis.
>>
>> So please don't de-rail into the weeds of second-guessing an expert in
>> mental health. Unless you know the person's mental health better than
>> their doctor (and you do not), don't second-guess the diagnosis they
>> received.
>
> I think for the most part, the mental health industry is most
> interested in pushing drugs and forcing people into some status quo.
>

I am disgusted by your comments.  I'll keep my original reply in reserve.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103768

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 29/02/2016 22:40, Larry Martell wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:26:32 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ian Kelly  writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Larry Martell  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found this to be a very sad story. Sure, he had some issues, but I
>>>>>>> don't think they needed to drug him, and take all that he had
>>>>>>> learned away from him and turn him back into what he was before.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "All that he had learned" meaning his delusions and psychoses?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed. If a revelation is unconnected to reality, it's misleading to
>>>>> say that one has "learned" it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?
>>>>
>>>
>>> A nice academic question. Not appropriate when we're discussing a real
>>> person's psychotic episodes. Neither you nor I are experts in whether an
>>> experience is psychosis, and the person already has an expert diagnosis.
>>>
>>> So please don't de-rail into the weeds of second-guessing an expert in
>>> mental health. Unless you know the person's mental health better than
>>> their doctor (and you do not), don't second-guess the diagnosis they
>>> received.
>>>
>>
>> I think for the most part, the mental health industry is most
>> interested in pushing drugs and forcing people into some status quo.
>>
>>
> I am disgusted by your comments.  I'll keep my original reply in reserve.
>
>
> --
> My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
> what you can do for our language.
>
> Mark Lawrence
>
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>

I really like requests.  I recommend it whenever people have trouble with
urllib.  As to Kenneth's personal struggle, good for him.  An interesting
and honest appraisal of his personal stuff.  Viva la internet

-- 
Joel Goldstick
http://joelgoldstick.com/ <http://joelgoldstick.com/stats/birthdays>
http://cc-baseballstats.info/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103803

On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:08 am, Rustom Mody wrote:

> And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that this is a genuine question, and
not just an attempt to ask a rhetorical question to demonstrate your
profundity.

You should not assume that there is any such thing as "the last arbiter" of
reality. There is no arbiter at all, let alone a final one. But what we
have are various ways of managing and uncertainty and error. One of which
is consensus. For instance, there are seven billion people on earth who
think they are people, and one who thinks he may be a butterfly. Which is
more likely to be correct?

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Zhuangzi

To quote Terry Pratchett:

      ‘The poet Hoha once dreamed he was a butterfly, and then he 
    awoke and said, “Am I a man who dreamed he was a butterfly or 
    am I a butterfly dreaming he is a man?”‘ said Lobsang, trying
    to join in.
      ‘Really?’ said Susan briskly.  ‘And which was he?’
      ‘What?  Well…who knows?’
      ‘How did he write his poems?’ said Susan.
      ‘With a brush, of course.’
      ‘He didn’t flap around making information-rich patterns in 
    the air or laying eggs on cabbage leaves?’
      ‘No one ever mentioned it.’
      ‘Then he was probably a man,’ said Susan.


Because there are limitations on how we observe reality, there are limits to
how objective we can be. We have an imperfect ability to observe the world
around us (including our own mental states) and are prone to errors. But,
over a wide range of conditions (although not *all* conditions) we can
eliminate many classes of error by comparing notes with our fellows, so to
speak. If I think I am a butterfly, and my wife thinks I'm a man, and my
co-workers think I'm a man, and my neighbours think I'm a man, chances are
good that it is me who is mistaken, not them.

Consequently reality is a shared construct -- or rather, our understanding
of reality is at least partly a shared construct.

In principle, at least, *everything* is subject to disproof. But in practice
some things are more certain than others. I wouldn't bet $100 on quarks
still being considered the fundamental building block of matter in 200
years, but I would bet a million dollars on the sun still seeming to rise
in the east every 24 hours.

As Isaac Asimov put it:

    When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. 
    When people thought the earth was spherical, they were 
    wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is 
    spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, 
    then your view is wronger than both of them put together.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wronger_than_wrong

http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm

It's not that reality itself is subject to change (except in the trivial
sense that we can take actions that modify the state of the world: I can
pick this cup up and move it over there, you can eat that apple) but that
our understanding of reality is subject to change. Sometimes our
understanding is full of uncertainty and doubt, sometimes it is subject to
re-interpretation, and sometimes our understanding is almost certainly
correct: it is difficult to imagine any credible or believable
reinterpretation that would change the facts as we know them. A thousand
years from now, the sun will still appear to be rising in the east.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103882

On Tuesday, March 1, 2016 at 10:36:02 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:08 am, Rustom Mody wrote:
> 
> > And who is the last arbiter on that 'reality'?
> 
> I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that this is a genuine question, and
> not just an attempt to ask a rhetorical question to demonstrate your
> profundity.
> 
> You should not assume that there is any such thing as "the last arbiter" of
> reality. There is no arbiter at all, let alone a final one. But what we
> have are various ways of managing and uncertainty and error. One of which
> is consensus. For instance, there are seven billion people on earth who
> think they are people, and one who thinks he may be a butterfly. Which is
> more likely to be correct?
> 
> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Zhuangzi
> 
> To quote Terry Pratchett:
> 
>       'The poet Hoha once dreamed he was a butterfly, and then he 
>     awoke and said, "Am I a man who dreamed he was a butterfly or 
>     am I a butterfly dreaming he is a man?"' said Lobsang, trying
>     to join in.
>       'Really?' said Susan briskly.  'And which was he?'
>       'What?  Well...who knows?'
>       'How did he write his poems?' said Susan.
>       'With a brush, of course.'
>       'He didn't flap around making information-rich patterns in 
>     the air or laying eggs on cabbage leaves?'
>       'No one ever mentioned it.'
>       'Then he was probably a man,' said Susan.
> 
> 
> Because there are limitations on how we observe reality, there are limits to
> how objective we can be. We have an imperfect ability to observe the world
> around us (including our own mental states) and are prone to errors. But,
> over a wide range of conditions (although not *all* conditions) we can
> eliminate many classes of error by comparing notes with our fellows, so to
> speak. If I think I am a butterfly, and my wife thinks I'm a man, and my
> co-workers think I'm a man, and my neighbours think I'm a man, chances are
> good that it is me who is mistaken, not them.
> 
> Consequently reality is a shared construct -- or rather, our understanding
> of reality is at least partly a shared construct.
> 
> In principle, at least, *everything* is subject to disproof. But in practice
> some things are more certain than others. I wouldn't bet $100 on quarks
> still being considered the fundamental building block of matter in 200
> years, but I would bet a million dollars on the sun still seeming to rise
> in the east every 24 hours.
> 
> As Isaac Asimov put it:
> 
>     When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. 
>     When people thought the earth was spherical, they were 
>     wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is 
>     spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, 
>     then your view is wronger than both of them put together.
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wronger_than_wrong
> 
> http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
> 
> It's not that reality itself is subject to change (except in the trivial
> sense that we can take actions that modify the state of the world: I can
> pick this cup up and move it over there, you can eat that apple) but that
> our understanding of reality is subject to change. Sometimes our
> understanding is full of uncertainty and doubt, sometimes it is subject to
> re-interpretation, and sometimes our understanding is almost certainly
> correct: it is difficult to imagine any credible or believable
> reinterpretation that would change the facts as we know them. A thousand
> years from now, the sun will still appear to be rising in the east.

Consensus? Um lets see...

Here are two writings:
[1] http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/blake/to_see_world.html
[2] http://www.bartleby.com/101/536.html

If you see [2] around line 75 it almost verbatim echoes Larry's complaint
of what 'they' did to Kennneth

And how is [1]'s starting different from Kenneth's finding his weight
to be the weight of the universe?

Maybe the authors of these need the services of a psychiatrist?

If not you may find some appeal in this modernized version:
http://blog.languager.org/2011/10/vagaries-of-intelligence.html


As for Asimov, yeah he's right perhaps in distinguishing wrong wronger and wrongest
Not so much in underestimating the time for humans to autocorrect their errors
A collection [inspired by earlier comments of yours :-) ]:
http://blog.languager.org/2016/01/how-long.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103926

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 04:02 am, Rustom Mody wrote:

> And how is [1]'s starting different from Kenneth's finding his weight
> to be the weight of the universe?

Is that a trick question? 

"How is a raven like a writing desk?"

"Neither of them are made of cheese cake."

We can be absolutely certain that Kenneth weighs less than the entire
universe. We don't even need a set of scales.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103929

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
> We can be absolutely certain that Kenneth weighs less than the entire
> universe. We don't even need a set of scales.

Formal proof:

1) No physical object can have negative mass.
2) I am a part of the universe and have positive mass.
3) I am not Kenneth.
4) The sum of my mass and Kenneth's mass must exceed Kenneth's mass alone.

Unless someone wants to dispute 1 or 2, we can be logically certain.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103980

On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 13:35:12 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info>
> wrote:
>> We can be absolutely certain that Kenneth weighs less than the entire
>> universe. We don't even need a set of scales.
> 
> Formal proof:
> 
> 1) No physical object can have negative mass.
> 2) I am a part of the universe and have positive mass.
> 3) I am not Kenneth.
> 4) The sum of my mass and Kenneth's mass must exceed Kenneth's mass
> alone.
> 
> Unless someone wants to dispute 1 or 2, we can be logically certain.
> 
> ChrisA

Anti Matter?



-- 
If you would understand your own age, read the works of fiction produced
in it.  People in disguise speak freely.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103982

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:21 AM, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 13:35:12 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> 1) No physical object can have negative mass.
>> 2) I am a part of the universe and have positive mass.
>> 3) I am not Kenneth.
>> 4) The sum of my mass and Kenneth's mass must exceed Kenneth's mass
>> alone.
>>
>> Unless someone wants to dispute 1 or 2, we can be logically certain.
>>
>> ChrisA
>
> Anti Matter?

Antimatter has positive mass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#103987

On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 11:03:55 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:21 AM, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 13:35:12 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> 1) No physical object can have negative mass.
>>> 2) I am a part of the universe and have positive mass.
>>> 3) I am not Kenneth.
>>> 4) The sum of my mass and Kenneth's mass must exceed Kenneth's mass
>>> alone.
>>>
>>> Unless someone wants to dispute 1 or 2, we can be logically certain.
>>>
>>> ChrisA
>>
>> Anti Matter?
> 
> Antimatter has positive mass.

Are you sure?
 mix 1 atom of hydrogen + 1 of anti hydrogen & you end up with 0 mass (+ 
LOTTS of energy)

To be honest it is all over my head



-- 
I used to be Snow White, but I drifted.
		-- Mae West

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web