The Wave (online) - Deutsche Übersetzung/ -German Translation

Faith

Faith

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Hallo zusammen :)

Mir ist aufgefallen, dass die letzten beiden Kapitel des achten Buches "Fehlerbehebung im Universum Teil I und II" genannt wurden. Da stolpere ich regelmäßig drüber ;) "Fehlerbehebung" widerspricht einer der wesentlichen Erkenntnisse der Serie, dass nämlich der Kosmos ein makellos vollkommenes, sich ausbalancierendes System von konstruktiven und destruktiven Kräften ist, an dem es nichts zu bemängeln gibt. Die antagonistischen Effekte der universellen Dualität wirken als evolutionäre und erzieherische Antriebskräfte: Geschlossene STS-Materie versus offener STO-Geist. Vielleicht wäre "Problembewältigung" das passendere Wort. Ich weiß nicht, wie es im Original heißt: Troubleshooting?

"Wenn die Menschen etwas entdecken, das „nicht schön“ oder „aus der Dunkelheit“ ist, oder etwas „Negatives“, dann schrecken sie in Angst und Furcht zurück. Und darüber hinaus beginnen sie sofort Pläne zu entwickeln, wie es „repariert“ werden könnte, denn offenbar ist in ihren Köpfen eine solche Wirklichkeit „kaputt“. (Laura)

"Die nackte Tatsache jedoch ist, dass das Böse, dass wir der Welt „zuschreiben“, und alle Fehler, die wir glauben entdeckt zu haben, einfach ein Resultat der Einschränkungen unseres Verständnisses sind. Je enger die Sichtweise ist, von der aus wir die Welt betrachten, sehen oder beobachten, desto böser ist sie und desto mehr Fehler finden wir". (Laura)

Floetus

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello everyone,

I´ve noticed that the last two chapters of "The Wave - Book 8" was titled "Fehlerbehebung im Universum Teil I und II" ( like error-shooting in the universe part I and II). I am tripping over it every time ;) "Fehlerbehebung" (like error-shooting) is contrary to one of the most important issues of the series, that even the universe is a perfectly faultless, selfbalancing composition of constructive and destructive forces, that cant be criticized. The anatagonistic effects of the universal duality works like a evolutionary and educational engine: closing STS-matter versus opening STO-mind. Maybe "Problembewältigung" (like trouble- or problem-shooting) would be the more appropriate word. I don´t know what the original title is, trouble-shooting?

In my own words the first quote (Laura) means: whenever someone deals with the dark, evil and bad, he shrinks from it out of fear and starts planning how it can be "repaired" like its flawed or damaged...

In my own words the second quote (Laura) means: ... but the truth is, whenever someone thinks he deals with a universal fault, like war and crime, its simply his own limited mind speaking out of fear and wishfull thinking. Its the flawed view, not the flawed world, the distorted mirror that reflects its surrounding in a flawed way.

Floetus
 
Re: The Wave (online) - Deutsche Übersetzung/ -German Translation

Hi floetus,

imo this is the appropriate translation for it. Maybe something will be changed in the future, because the translations of the wave books get worked over at the present moment.
But lets have a look what the original title is telling us. ;)

original title said:
Debugging the Universe
Click to expand...

Original Chapter in English

And if I have a look for example in one online dictionary this comes up, for -debugging-:

Beolingus said:
GermanEnglish
Austesten {n}; Fehlerbeseitigung {f}
Fehlersuche {f}
austesten; Fehler beseitigen; von Fehlern befreien [comp.]
debugging
debugging
to debug
Click to expand...

The interpretation as far as I understand it, is everyone should first start to work on oneself, to debug oneself first, before something can really be done. I think also the context of the whole chapters is needed.

Laura said:
Remember: meeting a jaguar can change one's way of looking at the world. And once we have met the jaguar, once we have understood that we "will do what we will do," let's remember the words from Ark's journals:

Ark said:
So, let's state the hypothesis. The only reasonable hypothesis that I can state is that one which comes from the unknown system taught by Gurdjieff. This system tells us that the World has a certain purpose. It tells us that not everything works well. It tells us that there are certain "bugs" in the construction.

It is quite possible that using the meta-language one can prove that any program on that scale must have bugs. So, the Universe is a program, a program which has bugs, but which has the built-in capacity for self-improving.

There are, therefore, certain units that are brought to existence with this specific purpose: to self-evolve to a degree high enough to be able to find out the methods of debugging.
Click to expand...

So, let's get on with Debugging the Universe, starting with our minds.
Click to expand...

[emphases: original]

Hope it clarifies a little bit.

And as always: help is at all times needed in the translation group.



Hallo floetus,
meiner Meinung nach ist das die passende Uebersetzung dafuer. Vielleicht werden ein paar Sachen in der Zukunft geaendert, weil die Uebersetzung der Serie der "Welle" momentan ueberarbeitet wird.
Aber schauen wir einmal, was das Original uns sagt. ;)

original title said:
Debugging the Universe
Click to expand...

Original Chapter in English

Und wenn ich in ein zum Beispiel in einen Online-Uebersetzer schaue, sieht man folgende Uebersetzung fuer -debugging-:

Beolingus said:
GermanEnglish
Austesten {n}; Fehlerbeseitigung {f}
Fehlersuche {f}
austesten; Fehler beseitigen; von Fehlern befreien [comp.]
debugging
debugging
to debug
Click to expand...

Die Interpretation, so weit wie ich sie verstehe ist folgende: jeder sollte zuerst an sich und mit sich selber arbeiten, bevor ueberhaupt etwas getan werden kann. Ich denke auch das der Kontext der gesamten Kapitel (explizit dieser beiden) benoetigt wird.

Laura said:
Erinnert euch: “Die Begegnung mit einem Jaguar kann einen dazu bringen, die Welt mit anderen Augen zu betrachten.“ Und wenn wir einmal dem Jaguar begegnet sind, wenn wir einmal verstanden haben, dass „wir tun werden, was wir tun werden“, dann könnten wir uns an Arks Worte aus seinem Tagebuch erinnern:

Ark said:
„Formulieren wir also die Hypothese. Die einzig vernünftige Hypothese, die ich formulieren kann, kommt aus dem unbekannten System, das von Gurdjieff gelehrt wurde. Dieses System sagt uns, dass die Welt einen bestimmten Sinn hat. Es sagt uns, dass nichts gut funktioniert. Es sagt uns, dass in diesem Konstrukt bestimmte „Fehler“ liegen.

Es ist einigermaßen wahrscheinlich, dass unter Verwendung einer Meta-Sprache beweisbar ist, dass jedes Programm auf dieser Ebene Fehler haben muss. Das Universum ist ein Programm, ein Programm das Fehler hat, doch das über eine eingebaute Fähigkeit zur Selbstverbesserung verfügt.

Es gibt deshalb bestimmte Einheiten, die aus diesem speziellen Grund existieren: um sich selbst zu entwickeln, weit genug um in der Lage zu sein, die Methoden der Fehlersuche herauszufinden.“
Click to expand...

Also, suchen wir die Fehler im Universum und beginnen wir mit unserem Verstand.
Click to expand...
[Hervorhebungen: Original]

Ich hoffe das erklaert es ein wenig besser.

Und wie immer: Hilfe ist staendig willkommen in der Ubersetzungsgruppe.
 
floetus said:
I´ve noticed that the last two chapters of "The Wave - Book 8" was titled "Fehlerbehebung im Universum Teil I und II" ( like error-shooting in the universe part I and II).
Mir ist aufgefallen, dass die letzten beiden Kapitel des achten Buches "Fehlerbehebung im Universum Teil I und II" genannt wurden.
Click to expand...

Hi floetus,

The chapter you refer to is http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13i.htm, and the original term is "debugging the universe".
Du beziehst dich auf Kapitel http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13i.htm, und der originale Ausdruck ist "debugging the universe".

floetus said:
Maybe "Problembewältigung" (like trouble- or problem-shooting) would be the more appropriate word.
Vielleicht wäre "Problembewältigung" das passendere Wort.
Click to expand...

I agree with Gawan here. "Debugging the universe" refers to your first citation from The Wave, where it says that there ARE people, who want to repair the universe. For this, "debugging" or the German word "Fehlerbehebung" is valid.
Ich stimme hier mit Gawan überein. "Debugging the universe" bezieht sich genau auf das erste Zitat aus Die Welle, das aussagt, dass es Leute GIBT, die das Universum reparieren wollen. Dafür ist "debugging" oder der deutsche Ausdruck "Fehlerbehebung" durchaus gültig.

floetus said:
In my own words the first quote (Laura) means: whenever someone deals with the dark, evil and bad, he shrinks from it out of fear and starts planning how it can be "repaired" like its flawed or damaged...

In my own words the second quote (Laura) means: ... but the truth is, whenever someone thinks he deals with a universal fault, like war and crime, its simply his own limited mind speaking out of fear and wishfull thinking. Its the flawed view, not the flawed world, the distorted mirror that reflects its surrounding in a flawed way.
Click to expand...
Rather than back-translating a translation (which needs by definition the double amount of work and is prone for errors of meaning), you could directly read the original version of The Wave, since it seems that your English is very good already!
Anstatt eine Übersetzung 'zurückzuübersetzen' (was definitionsgemäß die doppelte Arbeit benötigt und für Bedeutungsfehler anfällig ist), könntest du direkt die originale Version von Die Welle lesen, da dein Englisch sehr gut zu sein scheint!

Did you read the thread Becoming a SOTT translator: Help needed? Help with the translations or proofreadings is always welcome!!
Hast du den Thread Becoming a SOTT translator: Help needed schon gelesen? Hilfe bei Übersetzungen oder beim Korrekturlesen ist immer willkommen!!
 
Re: The Wave (online) - Deutsche Übersetzung/ -German Translation

For those who wonder that there seems to be already a "Book 8" for the German translation of The Wave: there isn't really. German proofreading of The Wave is done according to the book version (not the online version), since this is an updated version. Hence the division in books. And apparently, there is a handful of chapters that was removed from the first volumes and probably will be inserted into one of the latter volumes.
Für jene, die sich fragen, warum es anscheinend schon ein "Buch 8" der deutschen Übersetzung von The Wave gibt: es gibt noch nicht wirklich eines. Das deutsche Korrekturlesen von Die Welle findet anhand der Buchversion statt (nicht die Online-Version), da dies eine erweiterte Fassung ist. Daher kommt die Teilung in Bücher. Und anscheinend gibt es eine handvoll Kapitel, die von den ersten Bänden entfernt wurden, und die wahrscheinlich in den letzteren Bänden wieder eingefügt werden.
 
I like "de-bugging" even more :) But in this case bugs influencing the functionality of a flawless system (like the Lizzies do) is not the same thing as an error which occures because the system itself is flawed. So "Fehler" (error) is rather like an essential misconception then a bug crawling between wires and relays. Maybe "Entlausung" (like ex-termination) or De-Bugging which is also used in the German language would be better. I just don´t like the "we-must-repair-nature-because-its-flawed-attitude that is suggested by "Fehlerbehebung". The word "Fehler"(error) is very tricky and even a little dangerous. Same goes for the word "Erwartung" (expectation). I prefer thinking without those ;) They might lead to wishfull thinking or gene-technological enhancements and cyborg-implants.

But I don´t want to appear ungratefull. Thanks to the translater Rostam I could read these books at all. Its the only thing I noticed that appears to me as a "little bug". No offence ;)


"De-Bugging" gefällt mir sogar besser :) In diesem Fall ist jedoch Ungeziefer, dass die Funktionalität eines fehlerfreien Systems beeinträchtigt (so wie es die Lizzies betreiben), nicht das gleiche wie ein Fehler, der auftritt, weil das System selbst fehlerhaft ist. "Fehler" bezieht sich also eher auf eine grundsätzliche Fehlkonstruktion als auf einen Befall durch Ungeziefer, welches zwischen Drähten und Relais herumkrabbelt. Vielleicht wäre Entlausung oder De-Bugging, was ja auch im Deutschen Sprachgebrauch zu finden ist, besser. Ich störe mich einfach an dieser Wir-müssen-die-Natur-reparieren-weil-sie-fehlerhaft-ist-Einstellung, die durch das Wort Fehlerbehebung suggeriert wird. Das Wort "Fehler" ist echt tricky, genau wie "Erwartung". Ich versuche, ohne sie auszukommen. Sie könnten zu Wunschdenken führen, oder zu gentechnischen Verfeinerungen und Cyborg-Implantaten.

Ich will aber nicht undankbar erscheinen. Dem Übersetzer Rostam ist es zu verdanken, dass ich die Bücher überhaupt lesen konnte. Es ist das einzige, dass mir aufgefallen ist, und dass mir ein kleiner Bug zu sein scheint. Nichts für Ungut ;)
 
I rather doupt the German translation of De-Bugging in general. I am referring to the original meaning in the sense of an Ex-Termination.

Ich zweifele vielmehr an der generellen deutschen Übersetzung von De-Bugging. Ich beziehe mich hier auf die ursprüngliche Bedeutung im Sinne eines Kammerjägers.
 
Data said:
floetus said:
In my own words the second quote (Laura) means: ... but the truth is, whenever someone thinks he deals with a universal fault, like war and crime, its simply his own limited mind speaking out of fear and wishfull thinking. Its the flawed view, not the flawed world, the distorted mirror that reflects its surrounding in a flawed way.
Click to expand...
Rather than back-translating a translation (which needs by definition the double amount of work and is prone for errors of meaning), you could directly read the original version of The Wave, since it seems that your English is very good already!
Anstatt eine Übersetzung 'zurückzuübersetzen' (was definitionsgemäß die doppelte Arbeit benötigt und für Bedeutungsfehler anfällig ist), könntest du direkt die originale Version von Die Welle lesen, da dein Englisch sehr gut zu sein scheint!
Click to expand...

Hello Data :)

You are right. I just wanted to explain/ translate the two German quotes because I didn´t know the English ones. There are some quotes i noted while i was reading the German books, you know, to remember the chain of arguments . Unfortunately I didn´t note the exact location in the series, so I couldn´t compare them and quote the original, which would have been better of course, sorry ;)

Hallo Data :)

Sie haben recht. Ich wollte lediglich die beiden Deutschen Zitate erklären/ übersetzen, weil ich die Englischen Originale nicht kannte. Ich habe mir einige Stellen herausgeschrieben, als ich die Deutschen Bücher gelesen habe, um mich einfach an den Argumentationsverlauf erinnern zu können. Leider habe ich nicht die genaue Quelle notiert, so dass ich sie nicht vergleichen und die Originalzitate verwenden konnte. Das wäre natürlich besser gewesen, sorry ;)
 
Laura said:
Remember: meeting a jaguar can change one's way of looking at the world. And once we have met the jaguar, once we have understood that we "will do what we will do," let's remember the words from Ark's journals:

Ark said:
So, let's state the hypothesis. The only reasonable hypothesis that I can state is that one which comes from the unknown system taught by Gurdjieff. This system tells us that the World has a certain purpose. It tells us that not everything works well. It tells us that there are certain "bugs" in the construction.

It is quite possible that using the meta-language one can prove that any program on that scale must have bugs. So, the Universe is a program, a program which has bugs, but which has the built-in capacity for self-improving.

There are, therefore, certain units that are brought to existence with this specific purpose: to self-evolve to a degree high enough to be able to find out the methods of debugging.
Click to expand...

So, let's get on with Debugging the Universe, starting with our minds.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I cant help it. The word "Bug" has the potential to be interpreted in a more appropriate way. "Fault" or "Error" has not. Mailfunctions in nature can´t be compared to those of a very human software. This analogy is flawed.

In nature those are caused by interferences, by uncountable effects based on uncountable rules, so they are an unavoidable result of an ultra-high complexity. Imho that is what Arc means when he speaks of unavoidable bugs that are caused by a systems complexity. Think of it. Mailfunctions in nature are like a perfectly constructed aircraft that works properly untill a very heavy, perfect storm occures that could have an even deadly impact on that perfect aircraft. So perfect and flawless parts interfere with each other, unconsciously like the storm or consciously like the lizzies, to a degree causing mailfunctional effects. That is life. So dealing with a bug implies dealing with a parasite, dealing with an interference of effects, that needs to be exterminated. By the way improving something is not the same thing as repearing or correcting a thing. Modifying things could lead to a better adaptation. This is what life does all the time. Imho this is what Arc means when he speaks of the built-in capacity for self-improving.

In software-programmes and machines constructed and coded by humans mailfunctions are a totally different business. Those are based on ignorance and naivity, prejudices and simpy the wrong concepts that dont fit nature, that cant work properly untill they are based on natural concepts.

Applying the word "fault" or "error" to nature is like implying ignorance and naivity which would be arrogant and totally untrue. This not so humble opinion is a kind of self-glorifying for the benefit of wishfull thinking. In a moment of weakness this could be fatal. Think of people as being portals. The guy who discovers "the error" suddenly thinks he knows better than nature. Here the tail starts wagging the dog. This guy starts playing god, making the world fit his expectations, creating gene-technological enhancements for the benefit of good looking and being smarter. In the end we look all the same due to our glorious corrections: RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!

As I said before "error", "fault" and "expectation" are tricky words. In the wrong and powerfull hands they might lead, and as we can all see do lead to wishfull thinking. Even Gurdieff knew his messages would be disstorted, unconsciously or maybe even conciously by his own students, by those people who think that bugs and errors are quite the same ;)

German translation is following soon ;)
 
floetus said:
Sorry, I cant help it. The word "Bug" has the potential to be interpreted in a more appropriate way. "Fault" or "Error" has not.
Click to expand...

When I used the term "bug" it was to mean "a source of an undesirable behavior", with understanding that "undesirability is possibly uncomputable", that is it can not be "predicted" - even in principle.

Of course one would like to define, at least tentatively, "undesirable", but that would be like trying to read the mind of the Creator.

Concerning your comment, however, I am lost. What exactly did you try to say?
 
Hello Arc,

Its an honour to meet you here, at least within words. :) Maybe I have exaggerated it a little. Maybe its not such a big deal at all. But then I wonder why I am a little obsessed with it. Anyway.

The definition of yours is exactly what the word "Bug" means to me, and the figurative association that comes along with it, fits this exact meaning and supports it: "a source of an undesirable behavior" In the german translation "a bug" is just "an error" or "fault". Its quite the same. By the use of "Fehlerbehebung" your definition is flushed down the toilet.

So whats an error? While I was reading "The Wave" I suddenly came to the conclusion that nature works properly, regarded from an objective point of view. There are no errors and faults, no essential misconceptions. The universe works exactly like it is supposed to work. So "error" seems to be a very human term that refers to a wrong human concept, to a certain misconception that does not lead to the expected result. Its part of a STS-thinking-pattern. Making it fit my expectations. Whenever there is an error its wrong and must be corrected, even if its nature. Even a person could be seen as an error that must be, well... you know. Its all the same. The devine creators products should not be treated like its ignorant and stupid childrens ones.

"Bug" would be the alternative. It is something else that allready works properly, that is not based on the wrong concept because it even lives and even has rights! So regarded from an subjective point of view, which is of course necessary if you wanna live and get your rights, you discover many sources of an undesirable behavior that you wanna get rid off. So you start adapting by the use of different kinds of self-improvement- and enviroment-improvement-techniques. You are adapting yourself to nature, you are not fighting it. In this case you are not dealing with errors that must be corrected, you are rather dealing with an living and breathing enviroment that has its own rights which interfer with each other. Its more like chipping your way through the jungle.

STO and STS. That is what i try to point out. Such an adapting attitude I would describe as humble, rather STO: There is a little self eager for knowledge accepting the universe as the great master who will reveal his secrets as long as the little self does not fight him or her, the great IT, so to speak. Its about humbleness.

"Fehlerbehebung im Universum" sounds not very humble, on the contrary: It sounds quite presumptuous. It sounds like: Lets correct nature, make it work properly. Lets clear the entire jungle. Lets show the old silly master what mastership really means. My point is that we should start "de-bugging" our language as well. There are many words that need to be split up, that need to contain the basic attitude: STS or STO, "bug" instead of "error" for example.

I hope I cleared it up :) If I really exaggerated it too much I would be sorry. Being wrong would be as interesting as being right, as long as I am learning something ;)
 
Here are some more of my present thoughts ;)

As long as the recipients capacity of seeing meaning and order depends on the capacity of his imagination, he is not yet qualified to judge nature. As the recipient deals with structures of a higher order that look like chaos to his mind most of the time, a vedict like "wrong" or "error" leads to destructive downshifting or downgrading of the outer or inner nature. He brings nature low, humbles it instead of being humble. So the "meaningfull patterns" I can associate when analysing an amorphous structure are allways based on my own patters, which depend on my state of knowledge, on my capacity of simulating the outside world. Thing is, if I actually understood nature, if I could simulate it perfectly, if I were qualified, a judgement wouldn´t be possible. Here the circuit would be complete. What does this tell us about "judgement" and about "truth", about "expectation", "right" and "wrong"?


Hier sind noch ein paar meiner derzeitigen Gedanken ;)

Solange die Wahrnehmung von Sinn und Ordnung in der Natur von der Vorstellungskapazität des Betrachters abhängt, kann er sich noch kein Urteil erlauben. Da der Betrachter es mit Strukturen der höheren Ordnung zu tun hat, die er mit seinem Verstand zumeist nicht vollends erfassen kann, führt das Urteil "falsch" oder "Fehler" zu einem destruktiven "Downshiften" oder "Downgraden", und zwar in Bezug auf die eigene und/ oder die ihn umgebende Natur. Damit erniedrigt er die Natur und damit auch sich selbst, und zwar im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes. Welche "sinnvollen Muster" ich also in den amorphen Strukturen der höheren Ordnung assoziiere hängt also immer von den Mustern ab die ich darauf anwende, die ich in mir habe, und zwar als Resultat meines derzeitigen Verständnisses, auf Grundlage meiner derzeitigen Außensimulation. Das Ding ist, wenn ich nun die Natur tatsächlich verstünde, sie also deckungsgleich simulieren könnte, wenn ich mich qualifiziert hätte, wäre ein Urteil nicht mehr möglich. Dann wäre der Kreis geschlossen, der Zyklus beendet. Was sagt uns das über das Urteil und über die Wahrheit und über die Erwartung, über richtig und falsch?
 
[quote author=f]
Hello Arc,
[/quote]

Well, his name is Ark. A bug in typing?

[quote author=f]
But then I wonder why I am a little obsessed with it. Anyway.
[/quote]

I am also curious about it. One could say, it is disproportional.

[quote author=f]
In the german translation "a bug" is just "an error" or "fault". Its quite the same. By the use of "Fehlerbehebung" your definition is flushed down the toilet.
[/quote]

You are missing that we translated "debugging" and not "bug", hence "Fehlerbehebung" and not "Fehler".

[quote author=f]
While I was reading "The Wave" I suddenly came to the conclusion that nature works properly, regarded from an objective point of view. There are no errors and faults, no essential misconceptions.
[/quote]

On a high enough level, probably. But are we on this level yet?

[quote author=f]
The universe works exactly like it is supposed to work.
[/quote]

Who sez otherwise?

[quote author=f]
Whenever there is an error its wrong and must be corrected, even if its nature.
[/quote]

Are you implying in your paragraph that "debugging" is referring to "its wrong and must be corrected, even if it is nature"?

[quote author=f]
The devine creators products should not be treated like its ignorant and stupid childrens ones.
[/quote]

Who sez otherwise?

[quote author=f]
You are adapting yourself to nature, you are not fighting it. In this case you are not dealing with errors that must be corrected, you are rather dealing with an living and breathing enviroment that has its own rights which interfer with each other.
[/quote]

Are you implying that "debugging" is referring to "fighting nature"?

[quote author=f]
STO and STS. That is what i try to point out. Such an adapting attitude I would describe as humble, rather STO: There is a little self eager for knowledge accepting the universe as the great master who will reveal his secrets as long as the little self does not fight him or her, the great IT, so to speak. Its about humbleness.
[/quote]

Who sez otherwise?

[quote author=f]
"Fehlerbehebung im Universum" sounds not very humble, on the contrary: It sounds quite presumptuous. It sounds like: Lets correct nature, make it work properly.
[/quote]

So you are saying that when you're replacing a damaged light bulb in your house, this is presumptuous? Would you rather leave the light bulb off?

[quote author=f]
My point is that we should start "de-bugging" our language as well.
[/quote]

Certainly! Georges Orwell was of the same opinion in this essay! But why is "debugging" language not "presumptuous"?

[quote author=f]
There are many words that need to be split up, that need to contain the basic attitude: STS or STO, "bug" instead of "error" for example.
[/quote]

You probably know that the term "bug" comes from the early days of computer science, where real bugs caused short circuits in the computers. Where, then, is the difference between "bug" and "error"?

[quote author=f]
I hope I cleared it up :) If I really exaggerated it too much I would be sorry. Being wrong would be as interesting as being right, as long as I am learning something ;)
[/quote]

So you want to learn something. Wouldn't this also be "debugging" or, in German, "Fehlerbehebung"?

I think you miss the point that STO and STS would use the term "debugging" quite differently. STO candidates would work on debugging THEMSELVES (for improving), while STS would work on 'debugging' ALL OTHERS (changing and fighting the universe so that it more conveniently fits their demands).
 
[quote author=f]
As long as the recipients capacity of seeing meaning and order depends on the capacity of his imagination, he is not yet qualified to judge nature.
Solange die Wahrnehmung von Sinn und Ordnung in der Natur von der Vorstellungskapazität des Betrachters abhängt, kann er sich noch kein Urteil erlauben.
[/quote]

Why do you think "seeing" depends ever on "imagination"? I think you meant, when the capacity of seeing is not well developed. Then this is certainly true: If I cannot see that a person is as tall as me, then I am not qualified to judge the size of the person.
Warum denkst du, dass "Wahrnehmung" jemals von "Vorstellungskapazität" abhängt? Ich denke, du meintest, dass die Wahrnehmung noch nicht gut entwickelt ist. Dann stimmt die Aussage sicher: Wenn ich nicht sehen kann, dass eine Person genau so groß ist wie ich, dann kann ich über die Größe der Person nicht urteilen.

[quote author=f]
As the recipient deals with structures of a higher order that look like chaos to his mind most of the time, a vedict like "wrong" or "error" leads to destructive downshifting or downgrading of the outer or inner nature.
Da der Betrachter es mit Strukturen der höheren Ordnung zu tun hat, die er mit seinem Verstand zumeist nicht vollends erfassen kann, führt das Urteil "falsch" oder "Fehler" zu einem destruktiven "Downshiften" oder "Downgraden", und zwar in Bezug auf die eigene und/ oder die ihn umgebende Natur.
[/quote]

Again, which of the two polarities would have such verdicts?
Nochmals, welche der zwei Polaritäten würde solche Urteile fällen?

[quote author=f]
Thing is, if I actually understood nature, if I could simulate it perfectly, if I were qualified, a judgement wouldn´t be possible.
Das Ding ist, wenn ich nun die Natur tatsächlich verstünde, sie also deckungsgleich simulieren könnte, wenn ich mich qualifiziert hätte, wäre ein Urteil nicht mehr möglich.
[/quote]

Here you are fully contradicting your first sentence. And you are saying that, for example, a qualified, learned and experienced structural engineer (who by definition should understand nature) cannot judge if a bridge holds under a certain weight load. I think you are not understanding that there is a difference between objective and subjective judgment.
Hier wiedersprichst du gänzlich deinem ersten geschriebenen Satz. Und du sagst auch, dass z.B. ein qualifizierter, gelernter und erfahrener Statiker (der definitionsgemäß die Natur verstehen sollte) nicht beurteilen kann, ob eine Brücke unter einer gewissen Belastung standhält. Ich denke, du verstehst nicht, dass es einen Unterschied zwischen objektivem und subjektivem Urteil gibt.

[quote author=f]
What does this tell us about "judgement" and about "truth", about "expectation", "right" and "wrong"?
Was sagt uns das über das Urteil und über die Wahrheit und über die Erwartung, über richtig und falsch?
[/quote]

Let me guess, you think that all is null and void, right?
Lass mich raten; du denkst, sie alle sind null und nichtig sind, richtig?

Edit: Translation
Bearbeitet: Übersetzung
 
I hope I am not bothering you, but I think writing authentically, what I am thinking, even if it may sound presumptious or narcissistic sometimes, is the best way to evolve ;) I belief by encountering each other in a teasing way, a person can debug himself quite well. Writing authentically requires the most efficient use of words and that seems to be one of the cruxes of this matter. My own use of language is flawed!

Data said:
f] Hello Arc said:
f] But then I wonder why I am a little obsessed with it. Anyway. [/quote] I am also curious about it. One could say said:
f] In the german translation "a bug" is just "an error" or "fault". Its quite the same. By the use of "Fehlerbehebung" your definition is flushed down the toilet. [/quote] You are missing that we translated "debugging" and not "bug" said:
f] While I was reading "The Wave" I suddenly came to the conclusion that nature works properly said:
f] The universe works exactly like it is supposed to work. [/quote] Who sez otherwise? [/quote] [/quote] The words "Fehler (error)" and "Fehlerbehebung (error-shooting)" do :) [quote] [quote author=Data said:
f] Whenever there is an error its wrong and must be corrected said:
f] The devine creators products should not be treaten like its ignorant and stupid childrens ones. [/quote] Who sez otherwise? [/quote] [/quote] Our language does. Where is such a differentiation in our words? Lets reprogram people to make them belief. Its just another software said:
f] You are adapting yourself to nature said:
f] STO and STS. That is what i try to point out. Such an adapting attitude I would describe as humble said:
f] "Fehlerbehebung im Universum" sounds not very humble said:
f] My point is that we should start "de-bugging" our language as well. [/quote] Certainly! Georges Orwell was of the same opinion in this essay! But why is "debugging" language not "presumptuous"? [/quote] [/quote] Its not presumptuous in case you do it out of humbleness said:
f] There are many words that need to be split up said:
[quote author=f]
I hope I cleared it up. If I really exaggerated it too much I would be sorry. Being wrong would be as interesting as being right, as long as I am learning something.
Click to expand...

So you want to learn something. Wouldn't this also be "debugging" or, in German, "Fehlerbehebung"?

I think you miss the point that STO and STS would use the term "debugging" quite differently. STO candidates would work on debugging THEMSELVES (for improving), while STS would work on 'debugging' ALL OTHERS (changing and fighting the universe so that it more conveniently fits their demands).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
You put me the wrong way. I am not against debugging. I am against "Fehlerbehebung" unless you put the bug inside :D I dont say that "de-bugging" language could completely avoid STS-thinking. But at least it would be easier to differentiate the ways to go. So its good to have a word for error that reminds us of respecting nature and its rights, that makes us feel humble, if we are forced to inerfere in a destructive way. Sure, a psychopath would not feel anything. Normal people would.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Data said:
f] As long as the recipients capacity of seeing meaning and order depends on the capacity of his imagination said:
f] As the recipient deals with structures of a higher order that look like chaos to his mind most of the time said:
f] Thing is said:
[quote author=f]
What does this tell us about "judgement" and about "truth", about "expectation", "right" and "wrong"?
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you think that all is null and void, right?
Click to expand...
No its not. Its part of our lifes. It keeps the engine running and viewed from above it can be even funny (when watching a realistic movie). "Judging" really is one of those tricky words that both sides are using.

Is your subjective and objective judgement equal to my evaluating and describing judgement?

Now judge for yourself :/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom