The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Last paragraph: You can drop it, please.
So, maybe it is better that each tries to explore the other's view, if interested, and come back in a few diaries' time. I admit that this is not exactly a balanced approach since Valentin doesn't appear to be a contemplative scientist but knows your side.
I admit that this is not exactly a balanced approach since Valentin doesn't appear to be a contemplative scientist but knows your side.
What I meant by "balanced approach":
If one has been trained as a scientist and the other one in Buddhist contemplation and none knows the discipline of the other. Both can find out about the other and maybe learn from it.
If both are trained scientists but one has the vague idea (open mind) that there is merit to integrating contemplative (or other) methods into what is considered as scientific, then both don't have the same amount of work to do.
The raison d'etre of science is to provide universal answers. I find it very hard to imagine a "contemplative" approach that provides universality. That is not to say that contemplation is not interesting, but it cannot meaningfully be called science.
(Mig has a good Keynes quote saying something similar about economics and Queen Victoria...)
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
But the proper place for such things as net real output and the general level of prices lies within the field of historical and statistical description, and their purpose should be to satisfy historical or social curiosity, a purpose for which perfect precision--such as our causal analysis requires, whether or not our knowledge of the actual values of the relevant quantities is complete or exact--is neither usual nor necessary. To say that net output to-day is greater, but the price-level lower, than ten years ago or one year ago, is a proposition of a similar character to the statement that Queen Victoria was a better Queen but not a happier woman than Queen Elizabeth--a proposition not without meaning and not without interest, but unsuitable material for the differential calculus. Our precision will be a mock precision if we try to use such partly vague and non-quantitative concepts as the basis of our quantitative analysis.
by eurogreen - Jun 28 23 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 27 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 3 6 comments
by Oui - Jun 25 12 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 16 10 comments
by Oui - Jun 17 57 comments
by Oui - Jun 15 8 comments
by Oui - Jul 54 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 36 comments
by gmoke - Jun 29
by eurogreen - Jun 2823 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Oui - Jun 2713 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 271 comment
by Oui - Jun 2512 comments
by Oui - Jun 1757 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1610 comments
by Oui - Jun 158 comments
by Oui - Jun 1210 comments
by Oui - Jun 89 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 79 comments
by Oui - Jun 768 comments
by Oui - May 29163 comments
by Oui - May 22125 comments