RE: MD Can Only Humans Respond to DQ?

From: Erin N. (
Date: Tue Nov 26 2002 - 14:22:56 GMT

  • Next message: Trivik Bhavneni: "RE: MD Can Only Humans Respond to DQ?"

    >===== Original Message From =====
    >"Do they have machines that can detect [lies] on their own?"
    >I don't know, but it's not relevant unless you interpret Pirsig's
    >"no instrument can detect" to mean that the instrument must spell
    >out what it detected on a ticker-tape or worse that the instrument
    >is aware of what it detected. This stretches the common expectations
    >of a machine or instrument, as does the expectation that it can
    >complete the detection without anybody looking at the measurements,
    >or looking at them but not making reasonable inferences from them.

    No we can have a machine that beeps if a heart rate goes
    below a certain rate so I would grant that the
    machine detected a low heart rate.
    Does this machine indicate when somebody is lieing?
    When I see pictures of this I always see somebody
    who is trained to intepret the readout decide whether
    the person is a lieing.

    GLENN: As David said, we all add something when we read a measurement off
    >an instrument or a machine. All a machine might detect is a pounding
    >heart, and from this we infer that a candidate doesn't have the right
    >presidential stuff.

    ERIN: Yes I agree that the observer affects the
    observed. Lost me on the pounding heat thing.

    GlENN:When we read an outdoor thermometer, all we get
    >is an inorganic account of the temperature, and from this we infer how
    >hot or cold we'll feel when we step outside - a subjective biological

    ERIN: WEll I agree there is a subjective and objective
    aspect to feeling cold.

    GLENN: If we don't allow this human element, then we can all agree
    >that "no instrument can detect hot or cold", much less the President.

    ERIN: Well here is the point. We can set a machine
    to dectect when it is hot or cold (by beeping or whatever)
    but yeah that hot or cold is relative to us.
    I don't agree a machine can detect the President.
    It can detect a fingerprint. You would have to
    tell the machine what fingerprint is the President.
    So yes this 'human element' is what I thought was
    Pirsig's point so whats the prob?

    GLENN:>By the way, MDers, there seems to be many examples of subjective
    >biological patterns. Pirsig even mentions some, like the pain from
    >a hot stove and the high from orgasm. But according to Pirsig in LC,
    >the biological level is the province of the objective world. Apparently
    >this isn't completely right, either.
    >But let's see what we can deduce from Pirsig's statements:
    >1) biological patterns are objects outside our minds
    >2) the devil is a biological pattern
    >Conclusion: the devil is running around the earth, incarnate.
    >It's no wonder MOQ non-believers think the MOQ is spooky. It is.

    I find your reasoning spooky. This makes no sense to me.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archive -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 26 2002 - 14:16:54 GMT