>Okay, here's another tack. Look at all the weird trajectories a
>single leaf takes when it falls to the earth! Clearly a
>through understanding of gravity must be able to provide a
>precise mathematical representation of this single object's
>movement. In fact, we're doing a pretty good job if we can
>identify typical patterns of falling objects in general. If
>we focus solely on the "weird" individual, we run the risk
>of missing the general pattern. That's my beef with Z. bringing
>up this "weird" behavior thing here.
Except that leaves don't have brains and/or psyches.
I'm not sure what kind of "weird" behavior we're talking about. There was the woman I saw in the subway once who had a spacehat with antennae and a necktie all fashioned out of aluminum foil. I'm guessing that's not what we're talking about. But how about the maids that Barbara Ehrenreich writes about in Nickel & Dimed, who express absolutely no class resentment over the McMansions they're paid a pittance to clean, and even dream of occupying one day? Or the bartender I overheard in Toronto saying that Bill Gates deserved "every penny" of his fortune? That's a different kind of weird. Why do people think that way?
Doug