Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
There it is again, ... the pragmatic test of truth, but not the ultimate truth of the knowledge of origins and fails. Cannot explain "why" the constants work and cannot be entirely certain they are in fact constant. It works, so therefore it is true.
Yeah, I see the pragmatic test of truth again: it works, so it is "true" ... our math technology is good at technology and not so good at larger human questions about origins and meaning and future.
I guess the answer to my question really is that such "flaws" in math may not be all that significant to automotive and transport tech... unless we focus alot on the meaning, ethics, beauty, and the great "WHY" of such tech. A post-humanist approach.
|
Perhaps, when AI achieves consciousness, and machines become sentient beings, the more subjective aspects of mathematics and modelling can be explored.
A 'Watson', that's digested everything ever spoken or written about philosophical implications of technology, will have an upper hand. No human can possibly have a command of all that data.
RAND Corporation, NRO, NSA, CIA, FBI, Dr. Evil, would be candidates for early adopters.
