Posted by ron dw on June 08, 1999 at 08:03:43:

In Reply to: Re: What is the difference between information and explicit knowledge? posted by Reilly Atkinson on June 07, 1999 at 17:52:24:

As I understand it, according to Steven Hawkings, the theories of the macrocosm (whole) and microcosm are opposite. The macrocosm is understood in terms of spatio-temporal necessity, while the microcosm is understood in terms of coincidence. Bergson debated with Einstein about the temporality of space, attempting to complete it with the spatialization of time, or duration in experience. How necessity and coincidence are unified, has been the constant interest of all philosophy and metaphysics. The best integration may have been provided by Kant in his synthetic judgments a priori but I like Bergson's ideas even better. I believe that when these philosophies have good ontologies, they are open for empirical (quasi) experimental testing and… commerce! There is nothing as practical as a good theory (Kurt Lewin).

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Whole vs. Coincidence Reilly Atkinson 18:14:19 6/08/99 (3)
  • Good philosophical ontology? ron dw 09:19:25 6/09/99 (2)
    • Re: Good philosophical ontology? Reilly Atkinson 21:16:09 6/11/99 (1)
      • Re: Good philosophical ontology? ron dw 09:56:27 6/13/99 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: