Actually reading "Juggler of Worlds" right now. Second in Niven's Fleet of Worlds Ringworld prequils. On Sep 24, 2012 9:46 PM, "Victoria Hughes" <victo...@toryhughes.com> wrote:
> Fripm October 12. > When worlds collide. > > > On Sep 24, 2012, at 9:39 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote: > > Worksforme. > On Sep 24, 2012 9:34 PM, "Victoria Hughes" <victo...@toryhughes.com> > wrote: > >> Perhaps one could rename or subset the meeting as FRIPM. >> Meet at Sas' and finally combine the whiskey, the cast of characters, and >> the table-pounding. >> After October 10. >> >> >> On Sep 24, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote: >> >> Yikes. I might just have to break tradition and attend an actual FRIAM >> meeting. Has there ever been an actual fist fight at a FRIAM meeting? >> >> -Doug >> >> Sent from Android. >> On Sep 24, 2012 9:17 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Russ, **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Whatever SEP may have to say, we still have to talk to one another, >>> right? Notice that all these meanings have to do with God. If SEP is >>> correct, a person not concerned with god in one way or another would never >>> use the word. Do you put faith in the advice of your stockbroker? **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Forgive me if I am being abit trollish, here; I perhaps am not >>> following closely enough, due to packing, etc., to get back to Santa Fe. >>> This week I won’t make it for Friday’s meeting, but NEXT WEEK, look out! >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On >>> Behalf Of *Russ Abbott >>> *Sent:* Monday, September 24, 2012 9:42 PM >>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Robert Holmes quoted the *Stanford Encyclopedia of >>> Philosophy*<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/faith/#FaiDoxVen>as listing >>> these senses of "faith." >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> · *the ‘purely affective’ model*: faith as a feeling of existential >>> confidence **** >>> >>> · *the ‘special knowledge’ model*: faith as knowledge of specific >>> truths, revealed by God **** >>> >>> · *the ‘belief’ model*: faith as belief *that* God exists **** >>> >>> · *the ‘trust’ model*: faith as belief *in* (trust in) God**** >>> >>> · *the ‘doxastic venture’ model*: faith as practical commitment beyond >>> the evidence to one's belief that God exists **** >>> >>> · *the ‘sub-doxastic venture’ model*: faith as practical commitment >>> without belief **** >>> >>> · *the ‘hope’ model*: faith as hoping—or acting in the hope that—the >>> God who saves exists. **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Has the discussion done better than this?**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> It seems to me that we are getting into trouble because (as this list >>> illustrates) we (in English) use the word "faith" to mean a number of >>> different things, which are only sometimes related to each other. **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> My original concern was with "faith" in the sense of the fifth bullet. >>> (The third bullet is explicitly based on belief in God.) According to the >>> article, **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> On the doxastic venture model, faith involves *full* commitment, in the >>> face of the recognition that this is not ‘objectively’ justified on the >>> evidence.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> That's pretty close to how I would use the term. To a great extent the >>> article has a theological focus, which clouds the issue as far as I'm >>> concerned. But here is more of what it says about faith as a doxastic >>> venture.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> A possible view of theistic faith-commitment is that it is wholly >>> independent of the epistemic concern that cares about evidential support: >>> faith then reveals its authenticity most clearly when it takes >>> faith-propositions to be true *contrary to* the weight of the evidence. >>> This view is widely described as ‘fideist’, but ought more fairly to be >>> called *arational* fideism, or, where commitment contrary to the >>> evidence is positively favoured, *irrational* or *counter-rational* >>> fideism. **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> and**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Serious philosophical defence of a doxastic venture model of faith >>> amounts to a *supra-rational* fideism, for which epistemic concern is >>> not overridden and for which, therefore, it is a constraint on >>> faith-commitment that it *not* accept what is known, or justifiably >>> believed on the evidence, to be false. Rather, faith commits itself only >>> *beyond*, and not against, the evidence—and it does so *out of* epistemic >>> concern to grasp truth on matters of vital existential importance. The >>> thought that one may be entitled to commit to an existentially momentous >>> truth-claim in principle undecidable on the evidence when forced to decide >>> either to do so or not is what motivates William James's ‘justification of >>> faith’ in ‘The Will to Believe’ (James 1896/1956). If such faith can be >>> justified, its cognitive content will (on realist assumptions) have to >>> cohere with our best evidence-based theories about the real world. Faith >>> may extend our scientific grasp of the real, but may not counter it. >>> Whether the desire to grasp more truth about the real than science can >>> supply is a noble aspiration or a dangerous delusion is at the heart of the >>> debate about entitlement to faith on this supra-rational fideist doxastic >>> venture model.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> *-- Russ ***** >>> >>> >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:00 PM, glen <g...@ropella.name> wrote:**** >>> >>> Robert J. Cordingley wrote at 09/24/2012 04:38 PM:**** >>> >>> > But my point (regarding God) was an expectation of action by whatever I >>> > have faith in and has nothing to do with action on my part. The >>> > expected action can be provision of n virgins, not going to hell, >>> relief >>> > from pain, reincarnation as a higher being and all sorts of other forms >>> > of divine intervention.**** >>> >>> That's just a slight variation on what I laid out. The point being that >>> whatever the article of faith is (a being, an attribute of the world, >>> etc.), if it _matters_ to the conclusion whether or not that article is >>> true/false or exists or whatever, _then_ belief in it is more likely to >>> be called "faith". That's because the word "faith" is used to call out >>> or point out when someone is basing their position (or their actions), >>> in part, on an unjustified assumption. >>> >>> I.e. "faith" is a label used to identify especially important >>> components. Less important components can be negligible, ignored, or >>> easily adopted by everyone involved.**** >>> >>> >>> > PS I may have missed it but please can you explain what a compressible >>> > process is? (I know how it relates to things like gasses and some >>> > liquids). R**** >>> >>> A compressible system can be (adequately) represented, mimicked, or >>> replaced by a smaller system. Any (adequate) representation of an >>> incompressible system will be just as large as the system itself. >>> >>> -- >>> glen**** >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> 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 > > > > ============================================================ > 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
