Phil Henshaw wrote: > > The fact that we consider what someone else has to say as meaningless > because we don't hear the meaning is a defect in our upbringing in one > way, that no one did for us the hard work of erasing our 'naive > reality' of assuming the world around us to be what it appears to us > to be. What things appear to be is always impoverished in > comparison, and conveys a really false impression to us if we accept > appearances as what's there. > To be productive, it is necessary to invest only in those ideas where a broadly-defined payoff can be estimated. In situations where a listener can't make this estimation, the failure may be from the speaker or the listener, but this doesn't change the fact that infinite resources are not available for reflection. Even if it were, this would create incentives to forever confused people who would inevitably plead to others "Please give me more time because you don't understand -- I have a valid point of view!" > > There's a huge opportunity to change the world for the better by > recognizing that economic growth is permanent positive feedback > system, and as such is destined to fail dramatically at the peak of > its success, like any natural or unnatural system limited by nothing > else but being overwhelmed by it's own feedbacks. I've > said similar things 30 times here, without getting a single question > about it. People obviously think that if they don't get it there's > nothing to get. > What is one historical example of a dramatic failure lacking an explanation that is as accurate or as parsimonious as your way of thinking about positive feedback?
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
