Re: On science (phew, long)

[Dinogeorge <Dinogeorge@aol.com>]

In a message dated 98-03-01 18:47:56 EST, cwj2@eskimo.com writes:

<< > To this point: a goal such as having all the money in the world is indeed
 > quite irrational.
 
 That depends on where that goal gets you. If having this goal results in
 one being better off (say, ending up with more money), it is rational
 enough. Certainly a similar goal has served Bill Gates well enough, as
 well as his tycoon predecessors such as J. P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie.
 Similarly, seeking all the knowledge in the world is not irrational if, as
 a result, the person ends up with more knowledge than he would have ended
 up with than if he had not set out with that goal. (Assuming of course
 that gaining knowledge is in his rational self-interest)  >>

Then the correct way to state the goal is not "to seek all the money in the
world," which is an irrational (because unattainable) goal, but simply to
state it as "to seek to become a billionaire." You are indeed correct in
maintaining that many of the terms of this discussion need to be better
defined. If you believe absolute truth is unattainable, then it is irrational
to seek it; but if you merely seek something that seems like truth, then
perhaps this is something worth seeking. Seeking knowledge (which might seem
like the truth but need not be) is different from seeking the truth.