Marcus G. Daniels wrote circa 11-11-02 11:24 AM: > On 11/1/11 2:26 PM, gepr (d2g) wrote: >> There is a spectrum on which we all fall between internal<-> >> external. Those of us whose lives are invested externally have/make >> lots of stuff. Those of us invested internally have/make a minimum of >> stuff. Interesting orthogonal axes are make vs nomake and act vs noact. >> I've always been fascinated by those who make stuff then give it >> away or abandon it. > > Huh? Compared to say a toothpaste manufacturer, many academics are > specialized`internal' and want it that way. Yet they need and make a > lot of stuff (sometimes very expensive stuff) in order to investigate > questions of interest to them.
It's not clear what you're questioning. Anyone who is required to construct something externally in order to understand it internally is externally invested. Anyone who believes they can figure something out just by thinking about it, without external interaction, is invested internally. The chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Similarly, anyone who is required to think a lot in order to transform one set of things into another set of things is internally invested. And anyone who believes that some objective is achievable without thought, with simple stimulus-response ... automation, is externally invested. But, as I said, it's a spectrum. You won't find any functional extremes. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com ============================================================ 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
