Quotes About Model

In existential experienced life, we notice that we are making bets and choices all the time, and are responsible for being alert and aware enough to make them intelligently and to revise them when necessary. We cannot blame everything on The Real Universe, since it is only a model we have created to deal with experienced life. If the model is not good enough, we do not blame it but revise and improve it.

All experience is a muddle, until we make a model to explain it. The model can clarify the muddles, but the model is never the muddle itself. "The map is not the territory"; the menu does not taste like the meal.

We have made a beautiful (we hope beautiful) model of consciousness in terms of brain hardware and software. Now we need to remember again that, while the brain can be modeled by a computer, the model is never the whole system. The model-maker or metaprogrammer is bigger than the model or program.

These thingamajigs act like waves part of the time and like particles part of the time. This basic paradox has remained all through the 94 years of development of quantum mechanics and gives great comfort to those of us who believe no one model or perspective ever shows all the truth or the only truth about anything. For further details see my book, Quantum Psychology.

To be pedantic about it, no experiment or series of experiments entitles us to make absolute statements about mind and matter. Experiments only entitle us to say, at a date, that one kind of model seems more useful than another kind of model. To go beyond that and believe in a model remains an act of faith; the Christian Scientists recognize their own act of faith, but the Fundamentalist Materialists do not.

When we get down to sub-atomic or quantum level we encounter the model agnosticism I have been presenting. We have not one model but several; and we have also a widespread opinion that having more than one model may not be a fault or defect but a useful procedure in freeing up creative energies. We arrive — at least temporarily, and maybe permanently — at multi-model agnosticism rather than one-model Fundamentalism.

This is why physicists, following Bohr's Principle of Complementarity, no longer believe in either the wave model or the particle model but say both models are equally useful. (Which is more useful at a time depends on the context.)

It now appears that we may have a more complete quantum theory at hand, one that includes Hidden Variables. However, at this point, that does not mean we have found deep reality and can junk the Copenhagen Interpretation. It simply means that we have another new model — which implies, for most physicists, another argument for model agnosticism or zeteticism.

However, the implicate order as a scientific model does not equal classic deep reality in the Aristotelian sense, because it has the role of one model among many. Bohm, its father, does not claim it ranks as the only true model or the final model or anything like that.

Some call this Liberal Copenhagenism model agnosticism. Dr. Marcello Truzzi calls it zeteticism.

The only thing (or process) precisely equal to the universe remains the universe itself. Every description, or model, or theory, or art-work, or map, or reality-tunnel, or gloss, etc., remains somewhat smaller than the universe and hence includes less than the universe.

I jiggled the watch. An authentic Rolex had serial and model numbers cut into the head behind the bracelet, or on the inner rim below the crystal. High-end fakes often had numbers, too, but fake numbers didn't appear in the manufacturer's records.

Ivy could have been a model. Hell, Ivy could be anything she wanted. Except happy. Ivy had issues.

most economists are still working within the empty-world model of economics.

Somehow he had become the very model of the modern Martian scientist;

The rounded slopes, Phyllis said, indicated ancient water as clearly as the grain in petrified wood indicated the original tree. By the way she spoke Nadia understood that this was another of her disagreements with Ann; Phyllis believed in the long wet past model, Ann in the short wet past. Or something like that. Science was many things, Nadia thought, including a weapon with which to hit other scientists.

You should first of all assimilate the model. This is complicated. You study it from the point of view of the epoch, the time, the country, condition of life, background, literature, psychology, the soul, way of living, social position, and external appearance; moreover, you study character, such as custom, manner, movements, voice, speech, intonations, All this work on your material will help you permeate it with your own feelings. Without all this you will have no art.

A theory is just a mathematical model to describe the observations.

No investigation of our divine future can ignore our own animal past, or our relations with other animals – because the relationship between humans and animals is the best model we have for future relations between superhumans and humans. You

So far, many of these giants seem to have adopted the business model of "attention merchants."2 They capture our attention by providing us with free information, services, and entertainment, and they then resell our attention to advertisers.

If you can't be a good example, be a horrible warning.

Example is not the main thing in influencing others. It is the only thing.

Be a light, not a judge. Be a model, not a critic

If you want to be the best, find out what the top people do & do it yourself.