So what if, Plato in this case, is not real, and "the dialogues," using this figurative object, was used to create the dialogues? Can he have ever produced further thoughts for us to consider in dramas, without a bouncing board?
So is the situation real below?
Kansas Board Holds Evolution Hearings By JOHN HANNA
TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - As a State Board of Education subcommittee heard more testimony Friday on how evolution should be taught in Kansas classrooms, one member acknowledged that she hadn't read all of an evolution-friendly draft of science standards proposed by educators.
Kathy Martin of Clay Center made the comment while attempting to reassure a witness who said he hadn't read the entire proposal, just parts of it. Russell Carlson, a biochemistry and molecular biology professor at the University of Georgia, said he had reviewed an alternate proposal from intelligent design advocates.
Islamic Creationism In Turkey
Sometime in the mid 1980s, the Turkish Minister of Education, Mr. Vehbi Dinçerler [. . .] placed a call to ICR. [. . .] he wanted to eliminate the secular-based, evolution-only teaching dominant in their schools and replace it with a curriculum teaching the two models[.] As a result, several ICR books which dealt with the scientific (not Biblical) evidence for creation were translated into Turkish and distributed to all Turkey's public school teachers.
You have to wonder too, about thedistrust of and motivations seen in the Templeton foundation and the list of scientific personalities that contribute or those thinking of contributing?
This mistrust is seen by some as instigating such concerns as revealled in the issues above? Motivating society with fasle idealizations? I do not quite understand this. This is not a position I take, but was one of observance that I witnessed and relay here.
The whole issue around the Sokal Affair:
The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. To generate another essay, follow this link. If you like this particular essay and would like to return to it, follow this link for a bookmarkable page.
Is it intentional, or are people easily fooled?
Is there a greater design behind and leading people into falsehoods? Is this what everyone fears could happen to them?
It's strange, but this post of yours sets up a complex scenario. About shadows and light? :)
That the tenable position would be, "the earth they stand on," some how intrudes on the surface of the moon, and from behind the earth, the sun.
A classic Plato story? :)
But lets say your post is about something else?
Not just the plain ideals of observance.
Might one believe beyond the scope of our scientific valuations? To see, that it might have some other answer to why life is the way it is. What is it's motivator? It's energy?
A higher perspective on what we know about earth is summed up in an overview of the globe. Are not the intricacies of earth's design, much more complex, then it's mere shadow causing presence?
The expansitory thinking beyond straight euclidean thinking, is much more versatile? Reveals geometrical design much more intricate then just two dimensional observances?
Thought and observance, is now telling us to think beyond the hard fact realities? You can still be a scientist and believe in God. :)
A tesserack or hypercube is a four dimensional analogue of a cube. See the figure on the left for a 2-D representation of this 4-D object. More information about these can be seen and found. Many people have difficulty believing such can exist which is why such books as Flatland (Abbott, 1884), Sphereland (Burgers, 1983), and Flatterland (Stewart, 2001) were written.
I tried to show leading indicators in this trial, further expanding it's boundry into todays world. No less than, "climate exchanges on Kyoto," and scientist to scientist, "battle for supremacy of ideology?" Intelligent design?
More abstract, the inclinations of the quote selected provided a opportunity. About what few people will ever understand? Are the roads leading to complex scenarios about the particle world.
The way Arthur Miller quote might have sufficed might be to say, "that we need to think differently about reductionistic processes."
These are all governed by geometrical consistancies although we rely on experimental process. The progression to topological forms, as abstract processes. These are relevant to our "dynamical way of thinking." If lead to fifth dimensional scenarios, you are beyond the limitations of our solid world, becasue it arose from some place else first?
The "Calorimetric view," addresses this. We create the scenario of particle collisions and measure, particle production.
None of you would know this, but the inherent "opera of image," leads you to ask, "what is a tesserack?" Non?
The last two picture gaves views from a fifth dimensional element, where gravity and light have been joined. Dali's painting, and relation to the wonder of God's son. Are these related to these higher geometrical figures and wonder about God?
We are not simple machines. As well, the computer screen is a work and play on fifth dimensional imagery. Some might assume a atheist approach to life and settle on proofs, and a s a scientist this is expected logic to validation.
Yet there is still room for thinking that within the spaces of thought, the inherent suttleness of God might pervade all things? That such thoughts could lead us to higher pinnacles above the solid world, and what is present around us now?
Why should we allocate such spiritual thinking to classes of religions like Islam and the Turkey scenario? You hurt the quest for theoretcial endeavors by limitations of ideology? When the world requires innovative thinking, "to push the boundaries of our envelope."
Without leading to these realization of the electromagnetic principles, Gauss and Maxwell relations, might we ever understand the simple visionistic world of the magnetic field?