***We are continually in a relative condition of
Not Knowing What Actually Works. When something
works once 'bigtime', there is a tendency to keep doing it even when it doesn't thereafter
'always' accomplish the intended objective.***

True, but once our predictions begin to fail, we become dissatisfied with our theories and begin to re-evaluate them.

***What is occurring is we've found one part of a sequence that works. And when nature, only partially comprehended by us, supplies the
lead-in for our "whatevergetsthingsdone" input, and we apply it at the right time in the right amount, then, it "gets it done" that time.***

Right. Fortunately, however, our knowledge continues forward because of our dissatisfaction due to the times it doesn't work. Let's face it, magic 'worked' to a certain degree. It was only when magicians tried to improve their magic that they stumbled upon science. Early scientists often dabbled into what we would today call magic (e.g., Newton dabbled heavily in alchemy).

***Unfortunately, in the interest of protecting their positions of power, those who manage the
sequence usually divorce themselves from responsibility for failures that occur, while
taking a full share of credit for successes.
This is not ALL bad -- I don't want to change
the management team every time our ship sinks to the bottom of the ocean -- but we have to find a
way to make management more "comprehension-friendly."***

Well, the guild has got to stay in power somehow, right?

)-; vraH ,sdrager mraw

• tryingtothinkofasnappyorsuitablereplyIguesshowaboutyou? - carefuluniverse - September 13, 2002 - 05:21 UTC