Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 09:13:32 GMT
From: Chris Burford <cburford-AT-gn.apc.org>
Subject: BHA: Star reading


I am trying to get back into this list by reading backwards, 
after concentrating on setting up marxism-psych 
(please ask majordomo for info, if you are interested, BTW)

Howard wrote on 7th Nov:


>>For example, take three stars we find in the heavens in a
relationship we would call a triangle.  The concept of a triangle
exists (1) in the objects as a relationship of them, (2) in human
activity as we manipulate the concept logically.  There is no
ontological domain containing the concept triangle anywhere I know
of.<<


I am not sure if I am just picking up a fag end here, but
I think stars are an interesting example. The relationships 
that have looked so real to human beings for tens of thousands of 
years, (we can assume our subspecies has always had 
an intense interest in them), is very tenuous. What looks like
a triangle,  may be of stars that have
no relation to each other at all except that
 
a) they are in the same galaxy as us and 
b) they subtend almost the same angle to us as the light 
reaches our chance corner of the galaxy.
 
They may not be near each other at all.

Does this illustrate anything, or am I right out of the 
conversation?

Chris Burford
London.





     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---