Re: what is understanding?

[twayburn@juno.com (Thomas L Wayburn)]

On Fri, 11 Jul 1997 03:47:25 PST twayburn@juno.com (Thomas L Wayburn)
writes:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 97 20:28:54 EDT LUDWIK KOWALSKI 
> <kowalskil@alpha.montclair.edu> writes:
> > Hi Tom:
> > I am waiting for your mathematical model of understanding. But can 
> you
> > first expplain why you think that "it is not possible to perceive 
> > Nature"
> > with our senses.    Don't I perceive it what I see a sun set?

****************************************************************
> From the *Random House Dictionary* (RHD):  perceive v.t.  1. to become
aware of, know, or identify by means of the senses,  2.  to apprehend,
envision, or understand

Thus, Def. 1 answers "Yes"; Def. 2 answers "Not in the way that we should
like."
*****************************************************************
 My 
> question 
> > to
> > Leigh about this -->
 Is the process of understanding similar to simple sensing of
> > colors, smells, etc.? Or is it something totally different?
> >                                                           Ludwik 
> > Kowalski
*****************************************************************
According to the RHD:  Both.

But, let us agree that should a physics student present his lecture notes
in the form of a musical score complete with all rhythmic and tonal
variations of the lecturer's voice but not the "lyrics", not every
physics teacher would be as amused as we should be.   Thus, Def. 1
cannot be *exactly* what we are striving for.   Def. 1 is the first step
in a process that ends up with Def. 2.  Agreed?   Indeed, we must process
our raw sensory data.
****************************************************************
> > Does "percieve more acutely" stand for "an intuitive feel" of its 
> > inner
> > working?
****************************************************************
This is a question that is more difficult than the answer because of
traditional vagueness in the use of the word "intuit".   If I am not
mistaken, "inner working" is bad syntax in the sense of Russell.   I
won't touch this one.  Please reformulate in keeping with Occam's Law.  
Regards / Tom     P.S.  I must to work - on "understanding".
*****************************************************************