How much do you like this book?

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Raoul's Tuesday Reading


In today's reading, I noticed two major ideas that Dostoyevsky brought up. The first is mental recreation of a past even. For when the mouse goes into hiding it recreates all the "its injury down to the smallest, most ignominious details"; however, it begins to fill in details that were forgotten. In fact, we study this in memory psychology. Human's do not like to have a hole in our memory so we fill it in with an available memory. But the face is that the memory is often recreated improperly. Dostoyevsky talks about the filled in memory causing us to brew up desire for revenge. He says that we sleep and think all day about it. In fact this idea perfectly explains the behaviors of the narrator in part two when he is walking on the side walk. The next idea that Dostoyevsky talks about is again about the wall. He says that scientist show us that "one pound of our own fat must be dearer to you than a hundred thousand of your fellow-creatures", which explains why selfishness is a necessary evolutionary trait. However, we must refuse science because to believe in science to believe again in another wall. But I strongly disagree with this argument. For what if science holds the correct answer. Mr. Shapiro you say that it can not hold the right answer, yet it science (this man made thing) works. Science creates the phones that we use, the cars that we drive, the computers that we use, the internet that we communicate on. How could something that works so properly in the real world be wrong? Science is man made but the laws of nature which science tries to explain is not. Science properly explains these laws; therefore, it should be accepted. I do believe that there is no end to infinity, yet there are conclusions that can be drawn from infinity, you can not refute that. So 2+2=4 and an object of mass 1kg being acted on by a 4N force will accelerate at 4m/s. You can say that 2+2=5 only if your five has a value of my four (so therefore you are only arguing that language is man made), you can say that a meter is man made yet it defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458 seconds (and a second is "defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom." (wikipedia)) therefore it is truly based on nature! 

No comments:

Post a Comment