[OPE-L:5592] Re: Ockam's Razor

["Gerald_A_Levy" <Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Re Paul C's [5589]:

> I often say that when you can measure what you > are speaking about and
express
> it in numbers, you know something about it; but > when you cannot measure
it,
>  when you cannot express it in numbers, your
> knowledge is of a meagre and
> unsatisfactory kind."   (Kelvin)

This either represents ignorance on the part of
Kelvin or  taking a quote by Kelvin about
scientific theories out of context by Paul.

Is our knowledge about psychology,
anthropology, history, etc. of a meagre  and
unsatisfactory kind?  What about our knowledge
of cultural studies, the law, literature, and
the arts?  Yet, how much of our knowledge
about these subjects can be expressed in
numbers?

> One should also bear in mind that the objective
> of socialists is not to analyze the world but to
> change it.

The tasks of analyzing the world and changing it
are necessarily linked.

btw (relating this issue to the one above):  what
'percentage' of our knowledge that comes from
an examination of revolutionary history can
be expressed through numbers?

In solidarity, Jerry