Understood and agreed (01)
I think part of this discussion is about whether reality (uncertainty
in this case) exists independently of the observers.
I am trying to distinguish between the uncertainty that is independent
of the observer,
and the uncertainty that depends on the perspective adopted by the observer (02)
the uncertainty about a bridge becoming unstable
is different about the uncertainty of the engineers being able to predict it (03)
I consider the former an objective uncertainty - soemthing engineers
cant do much about, simply a fact of life, therefore a dimension of
reality, although we cannot model the dynamic precisely we know its
there - (04)
and the second uncertainty is subjective - engineers decide to what
extent they want/can incorporate uncertainty in their model,
therefore it looks to me like a subjective perspective (the risk
model adopted by the engineers may or may not be suitable to the risk
which exists independently from the observer) (05)
On 8/30/07, John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Different people may prefer different perspectives.
> Their preferences may be subjective, but that does not
> imply that the perspectives are subjective.
> To take the example of the photographs of the city,
> perhaps you prefer one photo and I prefer another.
> Our preferences are subjective, but each photo is
> an objective representation of one perspective.
> > ... how can I express such distinction otherwise?
> I suggest that you can start by expressing them as a list
> that says "Here are multiple ways of describing the same
> thing from different perspectives."
> The goal of science is to find general equations or other
> kinds of formulas that can characterize a large collection
> of low-level data more concisely.
> One of my favorite examples is the collection of data by
> the astronomer Tycho Brahe, who made very accurate measurements
> of the motions of the planets because he wanted to support the
> Ptolemaic theory about how the sun and other planets revolved
> around the earth. But then his assistant, Johannes Kepler,
> used the same data to demonstrate that the earth and other
> planets went around the sun in elliptical orbits.
> You could say that Brahe and Kepler started with the same
> objective data, but they had different preferences about
> how it should be generalized. In the end, Kepler's version
> proved to be simpler, more general, and more accurate than
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)