Re: uncertainty

[Bruce McFarling <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:33:26 +0000, Paul Downward
<P.M.Downward@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote, under the title
"Re: uncertainty",

>I must admit that I find the references to epistemology and ontology in
>this distinction unhelpful. It does lead to confusion. Look at the
>debates on rhetorical strategy between Paul and the CR's.

On the one hand, for people confused by the difference between
ontology (roughly, the study of what is real) and epistimology
(the study of how we know what we know), the terms will be
confusing.  On the other hand, someone who knows what the
terms mean can work out the phrase without having to read
the original source, to wit, ontological uncertainty means
that the outcome itself is intrinsically uncertain, where
epistimological uncertainty means that regardless of whether
the outcome is uncertain, we are not capable of getting
the information to know what the outcome is.

I like epistemological uncertainty, since it draws attention
to the intrinsic limitations in information processing that
the original neoclassical model simply ignored when it
drew upon a model of forces acting upon entities, and applied
it to people making decisions on the basis of information.

Virtually,

Bruce McFarling, Shortland, NSW
ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx