Dear B & G - I'm not sure if this is a bit or a bite, but here goes. Pondering
the penchant to dichotomize on unitary phenomenon I wonder why we don't talk
about improbables and predictables. As a person who tries to understand
manifestations of the immeasurable, I wonder about the explanatory nature of
statistics. As was mentioned in GA, statistics and measurement may help us
understand aspects of pattern manifestations, mayhap, even explain relationships
among those manifestations. Is it our intention to reduce the phenomenon or
separate it from its environment? If our intention is to reduce and
decontextualize the phenomenon, we may fall off the unitary wagon. I think our
job is to think beyond the pattern to the emerging patterning - which may be
light years beyond the capacity to enumerate, much less measure. [i am getting
ready for vacation and all associations are really loose right now] Back to
improbables. If Martha was thinking about the world as probablistic, expected,
anticipated events would be the norm. Where do improbables fit? How is
improbable different from unpredictable? are there statistical improbabilities?
Why would these be important to us? Perhaps we need to look at what we want to
accomplish in new ways, rather than, as our Guru suggests, use outdated
approaches to inquiry. As usual, I have more questions than anything else. mah
----- Original Message -----
From: kelly rutherford
To: Martha_E_Rogers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Martha_E_Rogers] Probabilistic v Unpredictability



OK, this backwoods brother will bite.

I tend to agree with Brother Bear's assessment about use of the term
unpredictable. The term does seem to have multi-conceptual use. As an excuse
to not "Scientifically" explore a pattern or phenomenon I would substitute the
concept of "Objectively Unmeasurable". When something cannot be reduced to a
number in an equation or a figure on a graph it is often deemed unworthy of
"Proper Scientific Research". I feel the key word in the last sentence is
"reduce", a concept among Unitary Scientist often considered "Sin" or "Fightin'
Words".

I'm not sure where this discussion began Bear, but it reminds me of defending
my Masters thesis against a panel of die hard, femanist, objective,
reductionists. Oops, my wife will kill me for that one, but it was a traumatic
experience. One lone, younger, male nurse practioner student against all those
old........ I digress. They are all respected friends and know how I like to
tease them about their horror when I presented a Unitary based position to my
arguments that none were prepared to discuss. I passed and survived well for
the experience. Back on topic. When arguments about statistical concepts
errupt we usually end up trying to defend the Unitary perspective. I took the
opposite approach and presented my position from the standpoint that they were
using the out-dated concepts of a paternalistic system that bases worth on
objective measurement with the admitted inability to measure significant
phenomena. Without being condescending I presented an integrated approach
that allowed acknowledgment of the unmeasurable and value to all pattern
manifestations, measureable and unmeasurable. A few of you may have seen my
model back in 1999? at convention.

So, I guess my question would be this. With this discussion are we defending
the Unitary position or exploring the use of statistical concept within the
SUHB?


Any takers?

GURU


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Martha_E_Rogers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]