|
anti fishstick, my response would be that to have an a priori notion of what is nature contradicts my statement "I have no idea what is really "out there"...
The acts of "seeing" or "observing" or "measuring" such things as golden rectangles or the golden ratio must involve the potentially erroneous practice of overlaying our own mental constructions on what is "out there."
That's the epistemological problem. The very act of interpreting golden-ratio-type relationships as preexisting in nature is a mathematical operation. What we do, it seems to me, is impose our internally consistent relationships upon whatever may be "out there." I can't see a way we could have any necessarily true idea of what nature is.
__________________
create evolution
|