Pat Gunn (dachte) wrote,
Pat Gunn

Perfect Frameworks

I've been thinking more about frameworks of knowledge again. "A characteristic of a perfect framework is that it provides a good base for both one's intuition and logic. A perfect framework might, however, not exist for some topics". Could there be areas of thought into which intuition cannot be mapped? This is really two questions, depending on if we mean literally the intuition that can be expressed in a human brain (that is, in the volume of space a brain takes) or if we mean some kind of abstract intuition in the style of ours but not limited by the space constraints. I believe, based on intuition, that the first answer is clearly yes. I argue that within a certain amount of space, no system, no matter how tricky (the human brain may be quite tricky), can grasp regularities beyond a certain size, based on it not having space to differentiate them. As to the second question, I really don't know. It's hard for me to really find a method to begin to reason about it. I might guess, based on Godel, that the answer to that is also no, but I really am not sure -- it seems to me that Godel's proof may only apply in the domain of binary logic systems. Hmm.

I've been setting up Cygwin for various people at work, among other things. Hopefully that'll help people be more productive.

Hmm. I've admittedly been feeling kind of hurt by Quealy's ignoring of me, but his most recent journal entry makes it not so bad seeming -- he's just a busy person. Apparently sometime in the distant past, he was more like me, and then something changed. I wonder what. Hmm.

I kind of remember what I was like when I was younger. Hehe. A younger Pat. Imagine. Well, except I don't really have an audience that knew me much back then, I don't think. But.. I really don't know who reads this. I was a zealot about a different set of things back then. I was always an atheist, but I was a moral absolutist. I was still a philosopher, although not with my urge to document. I didn't have all the cynicism I have now -- I assumed that most people I had contact with were broken just because they were young. I considered myself almost an adult, and loved to teach adults things about computers. I hung out with older kinds as well as other kids in the challenge/honors program. Yes, I was an elitist even then :) I still loved to read, and spent most of my time alone. I had a fascination with data and the specifics of frameworks. I ran a bulletin board for awhile. Before that I was into hacking into other peoples' systems. I knew a lot about how computer systems worked, but not why. Although I felt above most other people, I still felt a little bit jealous of the fun/ignorant things they got to say, the fun/dangerous things they did, their short term pleasure. Hmm. Maybe Quealy and I really wern't that much the same. Heck, I didn't know him at the time. I guess maybe I don't really know him all that well now.

Well, that's all for now. I just had a dizzy spell, and I'm not sure if it's my high fever (although I went to work today anyhow) or hunger. I'm going to go grab a bite to eat from the fridge, and hope it's the second.

Tags: philosophy, work

  • CMU, the First Amendment, and Indecent Exposure

    Earlier on my G+ stream, I commented on the matter of a CMU student who protested the Catholic church's coverup of sexual abuse by dressing as the…

  • Dilution

    I've been thinking about an issue that's been raised in the secular community; I'm not sure it's a good issue, nor a bad one. Let me lead up to it…

  • Commentary on the Human Rights Campaign

    I recently was pointed at a blog post suggesting people reject the Human Rights Campaign, a large social justice organisation that focuses on…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded