I don't know whether I'm being addressed. Please assume that some others among
us are familiar with Prigogine ,etc.
I'm bowing out of all of this preening. Please exclude me from the e mail list
hereafter.
No offense intended. There seems to be nothing one can say that doesn't invite
intellectual opportunism here. End
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas Roberts
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Young but distant (meaning old) galaxies, and quasars
Me, I'm a simulationist. I run these large, complex population mobility ABMs
in the utmost confidence that I can make the output support whichever claim
happens to be the current politically expedient one.
Pragmatism trumps vague Reductionism every time.
--Doug
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Kenneth Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John,
I tend to be a Prigoginist, see: End of Certainty, Ilya Prigogine. I
suggest you consider the case for thermodynamic non-equilibrium and the problem
it creates for reductionism. Some of us have come to understand complexity by
modeling wavelet perturbations on temporally extended, recurrent, non-linear
network graphs. The results have been very enlightening.
Caveat: such results have been met with great skepticism, if not total
disbelief, within the FRIAM community.
Ken
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John F.
Kennison
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 12:08 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Young but distant gallaxies
Hi,
I have been trying to figure out what my position on reductionism might
be, but I am running into problems. Does reductionism mean a belief that the
best strategy is always to analyze complex things in terms of simpler
components (with, I presume, a small number of irreducible parts)? Or is it a
belief that everything in nature is nothing more than a sum of simple
components?
--John
On 9/5/08 12:13 PM, "Jack Leibowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To Gunther:
I dont think the word is horrible.
Please note the quotes around the word in my e-mail.
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: "Günther Greindl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group"
<friam@redfish.com>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Young but distant gallaxies
Hi,
> This doesn't mean strictly remaining with restraints belonging under
the
> heading of that horrible word "reductionism".
Why do you think that the word is horrible? (be specific please ;-)
Cheers,
Günther
--
Günther Greindl
Department of Philosophy of Science
University of Vienna
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://www.complexitystudies.org/
Thesis: http://www.complexitystudies.org/proposal/
============================================================
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
============================================================
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
============================================================
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
============================================================
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============================================================
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
