Xref: utzoo sci.misc:1168 talk.philosophy.misc:951
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!tektronix!reed!lclark!dan
From: dan@lclark.UUCP (Dan Revel)
Newsgroups: sci.misc,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: The nature of reality.
Message-ID: <197@lclark.UUCP>
Date: 26 Mar 88 09:54:06 GMT
References: <343@thirdi.UUCP> <732@actnyc.UUCP> <356@thirdi.UUCP> <27440@linus.UUCP> <363@thirdi.UUCP> <746@actnyc.UUCP>
Reply-To: dan@lclark.UUCP (Dan Revel)
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR
Lines: 21
Keywords: reality credibility validity maps

In article <746@actnyc.UUCP> jsb@actnyc.UUCP (The Invisible Man) writes:
>I ... think one has a tendancy to try to understand (i.e. map) too quickly
>(just as one easily forgets ones dreams on awakening) until one believes the
>map existed before the mapped.

I agree:

The trick is to appropriate the map, as a map.  Many maps are inherited,
learned and followed by rote without the understanding that they are
1) provisional and 2) tools ( not rules, I know it rhymes, but I mean it ).

In retrospect maps that other people have used and left behind provide
an interesting view into the world in which they lived.  In the same
way our maps reflect our daily concerns, whether we are aware of those
concerns or not.  (A road map not only lets one find one's way around
but it also implies some interest in doing so, the location of a freeway
means somewhat less if you don't have a car.)

>"Absolute knowledge means you have nothing to learn"

"Absolute knowledge means dasein ;^)"