This is about what anthonynorth calls P-ology, and what I am looking for as inter-disciplinary patterns.
Many people are searching for this, we are not the only 2. It is a worthwhile, and probably a necessary goal.
Suppose we find a solution to this, or maybe a few solutions. Then we have a new language that describes, somewhat precisely, common problems in vastly different fields. And common solutions.
We could then easily understand problems in, say, biology, and relate them to say, problems in computer science. Or astrophysics, and use those patterns to stem the spread of malaria.
I am being serious, that is the goal, is it not? To use what we know in one field more effectively in other fields, that seem not to be related. But the patterns, and the solutions are similar.
So far this sounds good, and I think it is.
There is one problem though - we have to make up a new language to describe all this, and this language will have to express highly abstract concepts.
So the people who understand this language are highly specialized. Another layer of reductionists, the few who understand things in a holist way?
Hmmmm
It would preferably a "common" language, like mathematics, altough I would prefer something more intuitive—music?
I dunno... something like a new kind of "multi-dimensional-hypertext" like the ability html gives you to jump from one website to another that's completely unelated, but they are now connected through that piece of html code, so people can compare the info on both pages and find something relevant to them.
I think most of the time when a person sees something in one field that can be of use in another, is because they have this really weird & fantastic "Eureka" moment that borders on the mystical: so maybe it's our right brain the one that allows us to find the connections between the seemingly unconnected.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
intuitive and formal
Yes that is sort of the problem. Music, rhythm, colors and such things can give use intuitive ideas about what fits and what does not fit. So if we translate observations into those things, we can see or hear discrepancies.
False color images from satellites are an example of that. Another example is translating computer network communications into sound patterns - you can hear disruptions.
But those things are informal, even though they do certainly help.
A much more formal approach is Discrete Mathematics, and this stuff really does work. I have studied it for some time. But there is a problem - it is really hard to understand, even for the initiated. For the un-initiated, it seems like you are a very confused individual. Goedel Escher Bach gives you a slight impression of this stuff, but it gets much more complicated. Black magic or insanity to most people.
My main question is, how can this ever be understandable, except to the few who study this very seriously?
And then, why would anyone believe them, when they develop a language so specific and necessarily different from plain English, or plain Spanish, or plain Chinese?
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Who knows?
My main question is, how can this ever be understandable, except to the few who study this very seriously?
Maybe it is unattainable to us, but what about the children who are growing up in a world whre there has always been a World Wide Web, and things like Wikipedia & instant communication with people all over the world? Their perception of the world is different from ours, as different as ours is from a person of the XIXth century.
Maybe they could grasp all these concepts, and have a knack for seeing patterns more intuitively.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Possible solution
I don't think we need a new language - that would put this all beyond the grasp of ordinary or, for that matter, extraordinary people.
What I feel is needed is for 'specialists' to stop compartmentalising themselves and learn to investigate 'connections' - to not say, "Oh, but A has nothing to do with B, that's a different subject entirely."
Some of my best ideas come out of left field when I see a link between two completely disparate things - join them together and you have another couple of pieces fitted into the Great Jigsaw Puzzle!.
My two cents worth - simplify, don't complicate, or you'll set up another group of 'specialists'.
Regards, Kathrinn
it happens
Yes seeing connections, similar patterns, between unrelated fields is where a lot of solutions come from.
The problem is that we can't explain it in a way that other people can look up in a library after we are dead.
I'm not worried about a lack of original ideas, people will continue to have those as you (kathrinn) say. I am looking for a way to preserve the source of these ideas. We don't have that now.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
The source of the ideas
Comes from an open mind, not a compartmentalised one. This isn't something you can record in a library but is generated by a willingness not to compartmentalise. This isn't something you can put in a bottle.
If people would work across disciplines instead of jealously and zealously guarding their academic positions much more could be achieved in the field of all forms of research.
Regards, Kathrinn
source and communication
Right, the source of new ideas comes from considering things with an open mind. And you can't really write an essay "how to have an open mind," and then closed-minded people can learn it in 20 minutes. Very true.
But an open mind is not enough if we can't communicate the new ideas to someone else. Written languages are a way to do that. You can communicate new ideas to people that you don't meet. What is the use of a new idea when you can't tell anyone about it?
The specialized languages are used for that, as well as for more effective communication inside the specialist group. Farmers, carpenters, sailors, biologists, physicists, gardeners all do that. There are things that gardeners can say to each other that non-gardeners will not understand.
They do not have special languages to keep things secret from the rest of us.
Having said that, of course it is still a problem even well meaning people with an open mind have trouble understanding more than a few of these special languages.
So one of the things I am looking for is a way to express problems and solutions independently of the special field. If we had some way to do that, even rudimentary, then working across disciplines would be much easier. Plain English doesn't work for this.
I don't know how to do this right, but I try to keep an open mind and make progress. It is just that, from my point of view, not trying it at all is worse than trying, but getting imperfect results.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Skipping language altogether?
Maybe the solution is skipping language altogether.
It's like Morpheus when he tells Neo—yes, another Matrix quote...YET AGAIN!— that "Nobody can be told what The Matrix is, you have to see it for yourself". There are many experiences where words do a very poor job of describing what's being perceived by the observant.
Maybe with more advances in Virtual Reality we could close those gaps that languages cannot really cross, instead of trying to come up with new lagnauges that will complex things even more, when what we are aiming to do is simplify the data transfer.
I have simmilar problems in my job. When you're trying to describe some design over the phone to a stranger, you find that words are cumbersome and insufficient. But if you show a hand-drawn picture of the design to the person, the gap of understanding becomes narrower; if instead you give the person a computer rendering, the gap gets narrower still; with a computer animation where you can show the design from many viewpoints and rotate it to see every component, by now it's almost certain the stranger has a clear idea of what the design is. Now imagine if from the beginning the stanger and I can observe a Virtual Reality rendition of the design, where both could walk through it—if it were something really big like a house—or hold it in our hands if it were a small appliance. Thus technology would make words more and more unnecesary.
Although I'm certainly not advocating to get rid of words and literature! But there are times for poetry and times for practicality.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Language
I'm a bit late into this discussion. Been busy the last day or so, and I'm about to retire to bed, too. My immediate thoughts on the discussion so far are these.
The idea that the specialisations should be less compartmentalised isn't really a good idea. Specialisation has proved very successful. The problem is it is incomplete. It is this where P-ology plays a part - not to whittle away at specialisations, but extend what can be done with the knowledge specialisation creates.
What I'm talking about are two knowledge systems working in parallel, one a bedfellow to the other. All that is required of specialisation is the right for P-ology to exist.
Now, as to the language. If I think of a language such as English, it doesn't actually exist. Almost every word belongs to another language. This is its success. And the point of it is, there was no idea of formulating an English language. It evolved.
I feel the language Earthling is talking about should formulate in the same way. How do we define a language to explain things when we don't yet know what those things are? As patterns are realised and applications worked out, those things will create the language as we go along.
...
A brilliant idea crawls out of the corpses of a hundred failures
Anthony North
P-ology
Okay, I'm awake now. And I see the immediate problem with this entire discussion. Here we are trying to change the world, and what strikes you the most?
Three people have joined the discussion with you, Earthling. On one of the biggest alternative sites, THREE!
Far too early to talk about language, or anything else. I've been working with P-ology for over 20 years now. I've got book after book written, waiting in line for publishers. I've tried many times to get this thing launched. But it won't happen until you can excite an audience!
You do that by, first, getting people talking about it, discussing it, allowing them input into it. A language will come out of this. And when people think they're involved, they'll publicise it. Then a movement begins.
But how to begin it in the first place? The internet is not a good vehicle to do so, for a start. People have many delusions about it - they see it as this great 'communicator'. Yet is this really the case? Ask Greg how many regulars there are here - out of the whole world!
Plenty of hits, but they're transient. People come along for a couple of months, then get bored.
How do we solve this problem?
That's the first step. Then take it step by step by step.
Hopefully it'll get going before I die.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
To educate, first you have to entertain!
I know that kind of sucks but that's the way with our present society, and I don't think it will change for quite a while.
So, in order to have people talking about different theories first you have to make them interested, and by that you need to present your ideas in an entertaining way.
Dan Brown's sole merit may very well be that he brought a bunch of ideas that had been presented many years before, but passed unnoticed by the general public; but by wrapping the ideas in the form of a crime thriller, he succeded where others utterly failed: people noticed.
So, the idea would be to present the concept of P-ology as an entertaining medium that would later help you prepare people to discuss such concepts in a more intellectual manner. Notice how many magazines and newspaper articles have been discussing crystal skulls in the past few months?
So, how about a novel of a Yorkshire man with a strange ability to see patterns where others don't, and he is asked by Scotland Yard to solve murder cases; in doing so he caughts the attention of a very powerful conglomerate of companies who see him as a threat for their plans, and so seek to silence him forever? :-)
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Good idea
Now that's a good idea, Red. And I've done so many detective stories :-)
But that's right. Draw people in. For instance, you come to my mystery posts quite a lot at Beyond the Blog, but have you actually come direct there, or clicked Home while visiting?
You'll find loads of my concepts wrapped up in 'current affairs' and peppered with poetry, fiction, the lot.
The entertainment is essential.
...
Sin is what you've done once caught
Anthony North
Ooops... guilty as charge ;-)
I have checked the Homepage of Beyond the Blog—once or twice— and tried to check out the content. But you know how it is, so many things to read, so little time... and brain cells ;-)
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Internet
And this is another problem with the internet - this great innovation of knowledge and freedom. Once upon a time, people were kept down from lack of education. Now, it's available to all - lots of it - lots and lots and lots of it.
Information is coming out of ears. We're suffering information overload. And what is the upshot of that? No time to properly digest it. We're changing into data-processors. But is it turned into wisdom?
No time.
And then there is the 'freedom' of everyone being able to publish their thoughts. So many - so very, very, very many. So many, infact, that it is even more difficult, today, to rise above the masses. Yes, you can publish - but your audience is increasingly smaller in real terms. Marginal thought is therefore - and ironically - kept away from a mass audience.
Of course, we're told there are successes - the Arctic Monkeys syndrome. And it's true. On my own Wordpress, two bloggers made it big only a month or so ago with massive book contracts, one worth 300,000 dollars.
One of them was a not very good satire blog. The other?
You've guessed it. Lolcats!
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
LOL...cat
I forgot to add something to the "mystery-novel-patternology-idea": The Yorkshire man must have a little Chihuahua pet named Earl as his sidekick.
...Or a very annoying & foul-mouthed parrot. A red one preferably ;-)
I suppose that's one of the things I like abut TDG. It's a big site and I would love it if it had even a bigger audience, but not yet too big so to have my comments been dilluted among hundreds more.
And if you think about it, of all the info handled by millions on the net, 50% must be porn, and other 30% is celebrity gossips & funny videos. The 10% is serious info that could be valuable to any person.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
TDG
TDG is great, no doubt about that. We can really hammer out issues. But where do they go from there?
A Yorkshireman with a little dog? You must have heard of the Yorkshire Terrier, which is a popular little dog - mainly because we kicked them all out :-)
...
The balanced adult retains an inner child
Anthony North
Fine fine
And english mastiff then, called "Baskerville" ;-)
You're right, most canine little breeds are kind of annoying, with some exceptions like Bulldogs.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Much better
Now that's much better than the nagging little Poirot you first suggested :-)
...
The balanced adult retains an inner child
Anthony North
long time ago, grammar
Something like 25 years ago, approximately, I had an idea about dentistry and formal grammars.
For reasons that are really boring, I realized that the treatment plan for a dental patient could be expressed in a formal language. IF the findings of problems with the teeth and gums, shape of the bones, and so forth are complete enough.
Say you have identified missing teeth, and teeth with infections, broken in half, out of position, twisted, and other such problems.
You can make a formal grammar that recommends treatment for the complete person based on that. This approach can get pretty close to what is needed, much better than the hit-and-miss approach of most dentists.
No dentist in the world would believe that, mostly because they can't tell a formal grammar from their formal grandma.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Link
The link, here, doesn't work.
formal grammar
The formal grammar link is just to wikipedia, in case it still doesn't work.
I can't edit the earlier post, hence this reply.
Anyway, I think that grammars could be a useful tool in interdisciplinary work. Or something like grammars, with the same purpose. We need something that describes the structure of a problem.
What I have in mind is this: suppose you have a problem, and you can describe it formally. Perhaps with a grammar-like tool. Further suppose people in completely unrelated disciplines do that too.
Then you could look for similar problems in those completely unrelated fields, to see if those people have found solutions. You could at least find a hint, and then look into the "unrelated" field more closely.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Grammar
Whilst I agree that P-ology could eventually find patterns that can work in different disciplines, I think we need to remember P-ology can only be - and should only be - a bedfellow. If we seem to be 'threatening' specialisations, we won't get a look in.
Further, nothing should be done to actually whittle away at those specialisations. They ARE needed. They need to remain intact. They simply don't offer a whole picture.
Hence, whilst P-ologists could well devise language as you say, it will be ignored by specialisations, and rightly so. And believe me, even when we offer inter-disciplinary patterns, they will thanks us for our little input, claim to for themselves, and totally pollute the idea of common language to 'separate' it from the other disciplines.
It's called human nature. As for me, I'm called a cynic :-)
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
service
I see this as a kind of service or utility science like mathematics or computing. While some people do mathematics or computer science for its own sake, the main reason they exist is to provide better tools for other sciences and specialties.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Yes
The problem is that math is a left-brain language; I still think we should come up with a right-brain language that's more intuitive but that at the same time could be useful for scientific endeavours.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
left and right
It will be easier for the left-brain people, for sure. They are more comfortable with being formal. Sure they are as lazy as anyone else, and don't want to learn new things, when the old things seem to be working well enough. Even when they are wrong about that, which they often are.
Perhaps the big challenge is with the right-brain people, how can they be precise? I don't know, perhaps music and visual stuff can work there. But I remind you that many musicians seem to have left-brain aspects to them. And most of the good movies are very organized, it is not just a sequence of pretty scenes. There is a structured story.
I like watching movies with the comments of the directors and some main actors. They explain much about why they made the movie in a particular way. Pretty much all good fiction is that way, no matter what the media. Music is like that.
So there is structure almost everywhere. And the right-brain people know the structure in their field. I think they just can't talk about it to the uninitiated.
Classic paintings are structured purposefully to create emotions. Or sometimes to report the painter's emotions. There is structured intent in the work of Vincent van Gogh, from the composition of the scene to the particular brush strokes. I never met the man, I'm not that old :) But he seems to have been a very emotional, feeling, right-brain kind of guy.
So it seems to me, whatever your preference, and whatever your way of thinking, you will have to understand structure at some level. Even structure of emotions. Pure emotion will not get you any understanding.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Left or right?
I wonder whether I'm left or right brained? Analytical essays and current affairs coming out of one ear, poetry and fiction out of the other. I keep asking myself, but my answer is indecisive.
...
The balanced adult retains an inner child.
Anthony North
left + right
The right brain lets tou feel you're on the right path.
The left brain is in charge of follow the methodical steps necessary to reach your ultimate goal.
So it really has to be a marriage between the two, otherwise you get anarchy & confusion (too much right) or dryness & unoriginality (too much left).
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
the other night
The other night, I dreamed about grammars and what one could do with them. And how to sell the idea that they are useful.
Part of my dream was that you could predict terrorist actions with this.
Assuming a terrorist (or a bank robber or some such nefarious person) exhibits a typical pattern, you can describe this by a grammar. Then you can observe movements of people, and go after those that fit this pattern. You can predict what they will do with a fair degree of accuracy, without knowing who they are. This would be relatively easy to sell to governments, they would like this kind of control. And it would be much better than the profiling and the individual investigation that they do now.
After I woke up, I reconsidered the dream. There is a problem with this approach.
The problem is that it would work.
As for the parts of my brain - typically I have an intuitive feeling that some approach might work, then I have to check it. I have feelings about engineering - if something looks inefficient, it hurts me, I don't like wasted effort. I don't even like it when other people have to work hard. Or when machines have to work hard.
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
Exactly
It also happens with me when I'm designing something; you can spend weeks or months tediously working on something that you just feel it isn't quite right (and this is a really depressing feeling, this pointless attempt to polish a turd), but there are times when the first sketch you make nails it and you know it—then it's just a matter of bringing the idea to life, researching, tinkering and playing with its components until you refine them.
PS: And that dream of yours... *shudders* haven't you thought of the possibility that someone in one of those letter-soup agencies had already thought of that?
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
P-ology in action
There's already been attempts to carry out a perfect P-ological predictive system, though they didn't know it, and it was piecemeal. This is into earthquake prediction.
Consider what we know, now, about EM and brain effects. A premonitions bureau could encourage people to report 'feelings' and dreams. This could be cross-checked with animal movements - they usually know.
At first it would be of no value, but the secret would be to then work out recurring patterns of behaviour, placed alongside on-going geo-physical disturbances.
Once a definite pattern is highlighted, a real predictive system could possibly arise.
...
I'm fanatical anout moderation
Anthony North
Strange but true
Strange that you should mention quake sensitivity as an example of how P-ology could be used, Anthony, as I discovered last November that I am one of those people who are quake sensitive. I possibly have been for years, although I hadn’t before made the connection between pain felt and upcoming quake activity until then.
Apparently it is not uncommon; the most usual symptoms are either screaming migraines or clicking noises in the ear. I, however, suffer pain in my ankles and knees in varying intensity, also numb, cold or tingling feet, but only for quakes of magnitude 6.0 or greater.
Since I’ve been keeping a detailed chart of pain level and quake activity I find I haven’t missed once in 7 months, except on one occasion with a quake on the mid-Atlantic ridge and thus on the other side of the world from me.
In 1998-99 I kept track of TV reported quakes in my diary. Checking back recently to the days before the listings, I found I had also noted pain (and many probably unnecessary visits to the chiropracter!)
I was virtually crippled by pain for two days prior to the recent 8.0 magnitude Sichuan quake. My pain suddenly left late one afternoon and I learned about the quake later that night. It had struck at 4.30 p.m. Australian Eastern Standard Time about half an hour before the cessation of my pain.
So there it is – an apparent ability I would really prefer not to have as, being unable to foresee any anticipated quakes’s location, I cannot see a useful application for it. In any case, who would I tell? And who would listen? I’d be just another crackpot in the eyes of the establishment.
Regards, Kathrinn
P-ology
Now that was interesting, Kathrinn. But suppose we could identify a thousand people like you, and monitor reactions of all over a period, imagine what repeatable patterns could be discovered.
And in a way that no other discipline could identify. And this is just one area where holistic methodologies COULD provide value.
Of course, it may not - but surely it's worth examining!
...
Reality, like time, is relative to the observer
Anthony North
Quake prediction
It has been tried, Anthony, but those involved have, in general, been ostracised for daring to speak out. Some have been shut down, some ridiculed, and all mostly ignored by the 'experts'.
One man, a geologist, who dared to put a prediction in a local newspaper (San Jose area) - which subsequently turned out to be completely accurate - lost his job with the USGS. To his credit, he has continued for 30 years to make predictions with something like a 75% success rate, but only for the San Francisco and surrounding area of the US. The 'experts' say his methodology is unscientific and he was in considerable trouble from the authorities for possibly causing panic amongst the general public.
I am trying to research this more fully, but information is not easy to find. If I'm going to suffer pain on an on-going basis I would like to find out how it could be useful. However, it's early days since I made the connection and I'm still working on my charts to make sure I'm not imagining things. I've pretty much convinced myself that I'm right about the anticipation of a quake occuring but am still trying to find a way to determine where it will occur. After the success, or otherwise, of that - well I don't know where to go from there.
Thanks for your reply. Regards, Kathrinn
quakes or pain?
That is very interesting, and I see your point about this not being a nice ability to have. Aside from the pain aspect of it, which must be unpleasant.
Do you think its is the earthquake, or the pain and suffering that you are anticipating?
----
if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)
it's not how fast you go, it's who gets there first
1 question
I have 1 question regarding this pain you experience: Does the pain appear regardless of where you are, or does it only come when you are in a certain location, like your home?
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
To Earthling and Red
Earthling - I'm not sure here whether you are referring to my personal pain or that caused to the victims of a quake. If it is the former, I feel the pain before the quake; if it is the latter I would pick up the victim's pain on an emotional but not a physical level - and yes, that does happen too, but after the event if it is disastrous enough,such as the Sichaun quake or that which occurred in Izmit in Turkey, both of which reduced me to tears.
Red - It makes no difference where I am located, the pain is the same. One theory of quake warning is that wildlife and quake sensitive people pick up changes in the earth's crust due to the piezo-electric quality of quartz (makes up 15-55% of said crust). Unfortunately I live in a high quartz-component area, so the ground stress is probably intensified.
Regards, Kathrinn
Another 2 cents worth!
Yes, earthling, I see your point about a communicating language and the value of specialists.
What I'm trying to say here is that if 'specialists', or people from different life-paths, could stop using their own jargon and used common terms that everyone could understand then language as a communicator would not be a problem.
A case in point: my friend and I went to a local cabinet-maker to buy a piece of board each (for different purposes - although that's irrelevant to this example). She handed her required measurements to the man there, and I handed mine. He looked at them both and smiled. Looking at me he said "The draftsman", and at my friend "The dressmaker". Mine was specified in millimeters, hers in inches. At present we have too many options, so simplifcation is required.
Red, I also see your point about 'seeing' something - yes it makes things easier, but I don't think it's the ultimate answer to earthling's problem, maybe part-way.
Regards, Kathrinn
Complication
Hi Kathrinn,
Your example offers a perfect vehicle for P-ological study. Now, it would appear to be good to provide this ,simplification, but what immediately comes to mind is Kant's 'categorical imperative'. He asked, when deciding to do something, ask yourself what the world would be like if everyone did it.
So, simplify language everywhere. Where does it end? A single global language. Everyone speaks the same. Language and culture go hand in hand. So, single language single culture. Differentness begins to disappear.
This is very useful in some instances, but where does it stop? Why have the complication of all those genetically different cows or wheat. Let's simplify it to a standard geno-type. Problem is, you only need, then, one standard blight and we're gone.
What we're talking about here is the end of diversity, and the simple fact is nature and evolution only succeeded through absolute complication and diversity, trying every which way possible, thus increasing the chances of getting it right. Thus, the more we move towards simplification, the slower we evolve socially.
Are you recognising any of this in modern, western society, and the problems the world is facing?
Okay, you have one standard 'type' of everything. So why do we need so many different manufacture sources? Surely, better to have just one manufacturer. Thus, the number of organisations are reduced, and they become very big - so big that they can dictate to you. Welcome to totalitarianism.
Complication may well hold its nuisances, but it is our best defence against oppression and eventual extinction.
Okay, I've taken this far and wide, but I think it shows P-ological thinking perfectly. Look at a situation and extend the parameters of thought into every area possible.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
I see your point, Anthony.
I just didn't mean it to go that far - just to simplify the way we describe things and for 'specialists' to stop being precious about their particular little niche to the exclusion of others.
Regards, Kathrinn
Specialists
Sorry about that, Kathrinn, I was simply trying to show how P-ology would work, how far it would go to see patterns and problems.
Of course, in the non-P-ological world, your concerns are valid.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North