It's amusing to see when people have songs with negative lyrics, and even if their issues were long gone they'll still have the negative lyrics with them because of their sentimental attachment to them.
I would like to suggest you watch the remarkable 1991 Australian film called "Proof". It is a little known low budget movie (one of Russel Crowes earliest jobs as an actor) about a blind photographer's quest for "proof" ...explanation?
The problem I see with this argument is that to understand how something works is just to talk about it in a different context.
To understand how a computer works, you talk about it in the context of electrical engineering, of software engineering, of physics, of history, of culture, etc.
So you never end up with a full explanation, because new contexts are always being opened up. So I can't see how it can be *more* important than knowing that something serves a particular purpose.
yes... you don't need a full explanation because you can compare and order the explanations... i.e. compare two and see which is better by some criteria.
I may be missing the point because I haven't been following everything you may be implicity responding to. My response to what I think you are talking about is this: I don't think we know why asperin works. Do we need to know why before we use it? That's not the same as "ends justifying the meas" but it does seem to address the question you are discussing at the beginning of the video. Thanks.
good point.
It's amusing to see when people have songs with negative lyrics, and even if their issues were long gone they'll still have the negative lyrics with them because of their sentimental attachment to them.
PornographicSoul 2 years ago
an expression I heard " The end justifies the means, or it doesn't." best expresses how I see it.
cableslip 2 years ago
I would like to suggest you watch the remarkable 1991 Australian film called "Proof". It is a little known low budget movie (one of Russel Crowes earliest jobs as an actor) about a blind photographer's quest for "proof" ...explanation?
cableslip 2 years ago
Not knowing how things work exactly irritates me to hell. 'Just Means'
PragmaticLiving 2 years ago
The problem I see with this argument is that to understand how something works is just to talk about it in a different context.
To understand how a computer works, you talk about it in the context of electrical engineering, of software engineering, of physics, of history, of culture, etc.
So you never end up with a full explanation, because new contexts are always being opened up. So I can't see how it can be *more* important than knowing that something serves a particular purpose.
shiningwhiffle 2 years ago
yes... you don't need a full explanation because you can compare and order the explanations... i.e. compare two and see which is better by some criteria.
pyrrho314 2 years ago
I may be missing the point because I haven't been following everything you may be implicity responding to. My response to what I think you are talking about is this: I don't think we know why asperin works. Do we need to know why before we use it? That's not the same as "ends justifying the meas" but it does seem to address the question you are discussing at the beginning of the video. Thanks.
DarwinsHamster 2 years ago
I didn't get into something I wanted to... which is the "if you look into how it works it will stop working" angle.
pyrrho314 2 years ago
Agreed.
weirdsciencelab 2 years ago