User talk:Ed Poor
Vacation
I'm taking some time off to chill out. I'll still answer e-mail and queries on this talk page, but otherwise I'm going to ride in the back seat for a while. --Uncle Ed 14:33, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Enjoy! ;-)
Vacation Reading
Myth and Science - an essay, (1885) by Tito Vignoli (1828 - 1914):
[...]the primitive personification of every external or internal phenomenon, the origin of all myths, religions, and superstitions, is accomplished by the same necessary psychical and physical law as that which produces sensation. That is, men, as well as animals, begin by thinking and feeling in a mythical way, owing to the intrinsic constitution of their intellectual life; and while animals never emerge from these psychical conditions, men are gradually emancipated from them, as they become able to think more rationally, thus finding redemption, truth, and liberty by means of science.
We now propose to unite in a single conception this necessity of our intellect, at once the product and the cause of perception, and of the spontaneous vivification of phenomena; since the law may be expressed in a compendious form.
Both in physical, moral, and intellectual myths, and in the substantial entity infused into abstract conceptions, the external or internal phenomenon immediately generates the idea of a subject, since it is a fundamental law of our mind to entify (entificare) every object of our perception, emotion, or consciousness. If any one should object to this neologism, in spite of its adequate expression of the original function of the intelligence, we reply that the use and necessity of the verb identify have been accepted in the neo-Latin tongues, and therefore entify, which has the same root and form, can hardly be rejected, since it, like the former, signifies an actual process of thought. We therefore adopt the word without scruple, since new words have often been coined before when they were required to express new conceptions and theories.
The primitive and constant act of all animals, including man, when external or internal sensation has opened to them the immense field of nature, is that of entifying the object of sensation, or, in a word, all phenomena. Such entification is the result of spontaneous necessity, by the law of the intrinsic faculty of perception; it is not the result of reflection, but it is immediate, innate, and inevitable. It is an eternal law of the evolution of the intelligence, like all those which rule the order of the world.
We do not only proclaim in this fact a law of psychological importance, but also the origin of myths, and in a certain sense of science, since myth is developed by the same methods as science. These two streams flow from one and the same source, since the entification of phenomena is proper both to myth and science; the former entifies sensations, and the latter ideas, since science by reversion to law and rational conception finally attains to the primitive entity. And finally, if an imaginative idea of a cause is active in myth from the first, the conception of a cause is equally necessary to science. It is her business to explain the reason of things, and in what they rationally consist:
"Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas."
-- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 08:34, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks, it's always satisfying to bring something good to read, when going on a vacation. --Uncle Ed 14:39, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
boiling frog
Boiling frog (created by you) is an orphan. Where do you want it linked from? -- Kimiko 15:02, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- From Conventional wisdom, please. :-) --Uncle Ed 15:05, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Done. -- Kimiko 15:22, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
---
Draconian Ed Poor
Mr. Poor I am user Jesus Chirst (im on a different isp now), you had no right to block me from editing, and pruge all my friendly messages to other members, just because you didn't like my user name this frankly draconian, and it violates wiki's NPOV policy, which i will complain to Jimbo about
I'm curious about a couple of things: who was the first user to be banned, and when, and why? Rickyrab 18:21, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
24.207.69.51 continues bad misspellings
You asked for a note to be put on this page if 24.207.69.51 ever continued the misspelled contributions with no value. OK, he's doing it again. --roozbeh