The GOGMAGOG-letter

[Elamarna]

Interesting at one point dear old Pierre bless his little cotton socks, said he'd taken a few exams in the social Sciences, not even that he'd passed them or had a degree of any kind.

Yet still so down on anyone without academic qualifications.


Go figure.

sorry Gut

but he did say long ago:

"No. I donīt have a university degree. I have several. "

but when asked to confirm:

Originally Posted by curious4

"I see. In?"

the reply

"You really are curious for a lot of things, arenīt you. I think thatīs an excellent quality if you are doing research."

Regards Pierre 26-10-2015

However before that date 6-10-2015
the following exchange took place

Originally Posted by Pierre

"No. Iīm a scientist."

Originally Posted by Shaggyrand

"Pierre, could you be a little bit more specific on that? Psychology? Physics? A biologist? Library science? Crowd-science? Doing some PAR or participatory monitoring? Just curious. I do not mean to overstep your comfortable boundaries or pry much."

reply by Pierre

"Torn between beeing rude and polite."



Simply evasive, Never going to tell anyone Anything at all

[GUT]

Interesting at one point dear old Pierre bless his little cotton socks, said he'd taken a few exams in the social Sciences, not even that he'd passed them or had a degree of any kind.

Yet still so down on anyone without academic qualifications.


Go figure.

[SuspectZero]

I think Pierre may see himself as a scientist by this definition: "A scientist is a person engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge. In a more restricted sense, a scientist may refer to an individual who uses the scientific method. The person may be an expert in one or more areas of science." - Wikipedia
or by this:
"A person who is trained in a science and whose job involves doing scientific research or solving scientific problems" - Merriam Webster

[GUT]

What is known as a good all rounder?

Or a great artist, I think most can guess what sort of artist I mean.

[John G]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

Hi Pierre,

Scientist or nay, you're definitely something of an enigma. I'm therefore going to respond, somewhat uncharacteristically, with a quote:

"Curiouser and curiouser"

[DJA]

What is known as a good all rounder?

[Elamarna]

I believe you said you were a scientist. No?

yes, all the time.

Is he now saying he is a philosopher, well that is not a scientist, never has been and never will be

From Pierre

"That the paper should have the ID and address of the writer."

Without those details how could the police be expected to contact the writer?

" They could have believed so without having evidence. "

a belief based on what?

When i said evidence that would include the letter itself and plus suspicions they had, if nothing else, it was a moral duty on the part of the editor.


"And who cares if you call everything "he" says "a personal opinion"? "


PIERRE does because on 23rd December he said

"Gut feeling", "personal opinions" and stuff like that can not be used to write history."


"Yes. Do note that. That is his personal opinion."

Actually he said


"Hi Amanda,

No. Iīm a scientist.

Regards Pierre "



"Hi,

I am a scientist but not within the field of natural science.

Pierre "


"Hi Steve,

I have several exams within the social sciences.

Regards Pierre "

[GUT]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

If your basing it I your methods, another failure in qualifying a a scientist,

if in your name, we know it not,


if on your education or titles, those you refuse to disclose.

So we all have to say Pierre a scientist is not.

[Mayerling]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

Pierre - your ignorance of history in the field of science and in the field of philosophy is amazing for such a self-proclaimed expert. In Socrates day there was no profession called "scientist". They had what was called "natural philosophers". There were some mathematicians, such as Pythagoras and Archimedes, and some of them put their ideas to practical uses (like Archimedes), but most did not. Aristotle is usually considered the first major scientist of the ancient world TODAY, but in his day he was a natural philosopher and teacher (of Alexander the Great for example). Aristotle is the first ancient writer to try to figure out the basic beginnings of everything on the planet - whose writings we have more or less completely. Much of what he said has since been disproved, but even so it was quite impressive.

Other philosophers who discussed their opinions on what made up matter did put down these ideas but their works were lost to us except for small excerpts or synopsis that were copied down in encyclopedias like Pliny the Elder's "Natural History" (you remember him - he was the savant and Roman Admiral, who was killed by the fumes from Mt. Vesuvius in the eruption of 79 A.D. that destroyed Pompeii and Herculenium - not to be confused with his nephew Pliny the Younger who left us an account of his Uncle's death in his surviving letters).

Socrates left no writings. His teachings (as they are) are found in the books of Plato, his greatest student, and in those of Xenophon the Athenian soldier and historian (hero of the "Anabasis"). Historians using these two sources, as well as Aristophanes' play "The Clouds" and a passage in Thucydides' "History of the Peloponnesian War" to figure out what Socrates actually said, as they ascribe the ideas given in Plato's works like "The Symposium" and "The Republic" as mostly Plato's, but Xenophon makes Socrates seem more accessible on a lower level. What both do show is Socrates creation of the "question and answer" method now called after him:
"The Socratic Method". It was a great step forward, as it was to arrive at the truth - though many have bent it to arrive at their own concepts of the truth. Socrates himself has been accused of this in some of Plato's dialogs, but these may be Plato himself doing it. After all, Plato does have Socrates talk of the need for a "philosopher king" to rule in "The Republic", but it seems to many scholars that this is Plato's belated attempt at wish fulfillment that Socrates should have had such a post, rather than being tried and condemned by Athens and put to death with hemlock.

Rene Descartes was one of several figures in the early 17th Century who revolutionized scientific curiosity and method. His chief is the "Critique of Pure Reason", which showed how to properly reason out a problem, but in particular aimed at application to scientific efforts. Still he and his contemporaries (Sir Francis Bacon comes to mind) were also into other fields. Bacon was Lord Chancellor of England for awhile, until he was impeached and removed for corruption in the reign of King James I of England and Vi of Scotland (this was before the unification of Scotland and England in 1707). Bacon did conduct scientific experiments on his own, and died from a severe cold contracted when he tried to use snow in a 17th Century attempt at food refrigeration (I kid you not on that!). Others in the movement were Giordano Bruno (who fell under the disapproval of the Inquisition and was burned at the stake in 1600) and Galileo (who ended up under house arrest for insisting that Copernicus' theory of a sun centered solar system was proved by his own findings). Descartes concentrated on mathematics, pointing out that it gave the firmest and surest background to proving all issues in science, and basically he connects the ancient mathematicians to modern math by giving the feet to modern algebra. However, like Bacon he had other abilities, and he would die in Stockholm in the 1630s when he went there to be an advisor to Queen Christina.

Why you put Jean-Paul Sartre on the three choices you gave is anyone's guess! Sartre, the father of the movement of "existentialism" was a writer, not (as far as I recall) a scientist. He wrote a novel or two also (most notably "Nausea"). He also was a bit too fond of the left of center views of the students of his period - and frequently supported the Soviet Union in it's actions, as opposed to the U.S. Perhaps because you are French (at least I believe so) you think highly of him, but "existentialism" was already on the decline during the last decade or so of Sartre's life.

My answer is not going to please you, and I suspect it is too long, and really not on the topic of the GogMagog Letter, but you insisted on responding to an earlier comment of mine so I had to offer a little response. No doubt you will tear it apart - or try to do so.

Jeff

[Bridewell]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

Several questions there, Pierre, but no answers. I'll draw the obvious conclusion. I note that others have very sensibly done the same.

[GUT]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

And just look at the ego.

[GUT]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

There's the answer folks, he ain't one.

[SuspectZero]

Kind regards from him

"I note that once again he does not comment on his training other than to tell the world he is a scientist.
Yes. Do note that. That is his personal opinion."

So then your personal opinion is that you are a scientist per your response. Do you have the credentials to label yourself a scientist professionally?

[Pierre]

in response to Pierre’s post


"Unless of course you are suggesting that the paper had the writers true ID and address and a reason to suspecting it was from the killer. None of which you have offered.."

"That is only your own thinking. "

what is my thinking?

That the paper should have the ID and address of the writer.

if the paper were serious in their suggestion they must have had a reason for such.

Pierre has not provided anything to back up that suggestion since he raised this letter in the thread. Therefore it is not only "my thinking"

If the Paper believed this was a communication from the killer or the letter was of any importance at all, can the poster suggest any reason why the paper would recommend in print the police contacted the writer rather than supplying the evidence directly to the police.

They could have believed so without having evidence.

Pierre has presented no evidence that the torso murders are connected to the killings in Whitechapel, just his belief that they are, that is not even an hypothesis because without evidence it can not be tested. Until he presents an evidence back hypothesis it is a personal opinion no more no less!

And who cares if you call everything "he" says "a personal opinion"?

I note that once again he does not comment on his training other than to tell the world he is a scientist.

Yes. Do note that. That is his personal opinion.

Kind regards from him

[SuspectZero]

Great minds, yes indeed. Was Socrates a scientist? Was Descartes a scientist? Was Sartre a scientist? Have they been peer-reviewed? Is the scientist a scientist because of his name, because of his titles or because of his education or methods?

Regards, Pierre

I believe you said you were a scientist. No?