Normal Distribution (Bell Curve)

Modules Utility
41

Just on my break here. Hey. Sorry if I brought undue unhappiness to the atmosphere here. But, remember, as you have decided to give

along with just about everyone else, I am here by myself. It’s been a long life of this and it sucks. Socrates, the intellectual hero of my discipline was made to drink poison. I do not consider that a romantic moment. It’s an absolute tragedy. I imagine that the intellectual heroes of computer programmers received Nobel prizes. Charles Sanders Pierce, who is credited with founding American Pragmatism (which is not to be confused with “just do what works”) actually had to burn all of his household furniture just to keep him and his wife warm.

You might then decide to chuckle to yourself with the conclusion that he should have studied, say, engineering instead. Here’s a bold claim: If we erased the work of the people in the philosophy department, there probably wouldn’t even be a university, let alone a computer science department. Of course, someone could get bent out of shape about that. But, if you look back at who handed over the ideas that made the foundations possible, it starts to seem very plausible.

I went to pains to mention that I am in a difficult position because everyone is always on the verge of being insulted by a philosopher. That was the bit about the mechanic and what not. I basically never discuss any of it with anyone. Its pretty tough. But I’ll be here. Maybe over many lifetimes.

1 Like
42

@stschoen has written me a very kind and considerate response. I was going to respond directly but I want to make something clear.

I take modules that the competent people here build and I make pretty connections. The people who build these modules are intellectually superior in terms of programming, etc. I thought that by limiting my participation in building, and instead just appreciating what other people do, I thought that was a vital role to play. In fact, I know it is, whether I play it well or not.

Many people have captured my interest here. Regardless of whether or not I was onto something above, this forum is about sound synthesis and I hope that in the future I can operate in a way that is less flaky. All that being said, I believe what I wrote and I don’t believe it is easy to understand how these subjects reverse themselves, inside and out, as you dive deeper. It is a funny thing how science often champions counterintuitive findings. Yet, there seems to be a lot of irritation when these ideas start to knock at whole belief systems.

I was feeling really crappy today so I called my Dad. He’s an engineer who took up reading philosophy because his son managed to make some points that unhinged him at some point. My Dad had a hearty laugh because he has been trying to trod though the harder books, the 2000 page books.

Toward the end of a graduate seminar I took with the guy who first translated works by the “father” of modern logic from German to English, after all the dust settled I turned to everyone and said this:

“Look, it may be the case that discovery can not go on forever.” I don’t expect anyone to understand that point. But someone might – someone who could start to conceive of what a speculative realism would look like. We must account for the imagination.

Lastly, I must address the accusation that

I am just going to hang this comment in the air. Then I want to add that most of the time I do not respond to counterconsiderations when things get thick like this. The word ‘cogent’ was used.

If anyone is interested, your great American author the late Robert Pirsig spent his life working on some of this. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. IMO one of the most important American Novels in the 20th century.

43

One final post of a lecture by Wilfrid Sellars. This is a rare treat. I was, among other things, accused of obfuscating the discussion by mentioning thinkers but not providing concrete arguments. In other words, I was supposed to be practising analytic philosophy. When I transferred schools a nice professor warned me that the place I was transferring to was known as “the last bastion of logical positivism.” So I found myself in an odd department. But it toughened me.

The reason I tend to name thinkers is the same reason people use big words – because the mind gathers ideas into little chunks and integrates them in particular ways such that once the components of blocks have been checked, the blocks themselves can be used as components. In order to make a big claim, there must be a lot of assumptions at work in order to even conceive of what the conjecture is resting on.

Wilfrid Sellars. I am sorry. If he’s watching from the grave I bet he wouldn’t be too miffed ending up at the bottom of a Normal Distribution (Bell Curve) synthesizer forum subject.

1 Like
44

This module has been a huge help to me!

45

Glad you found it useful. :cowboy_hat_face: