Gary/Pamela/(Stephen, Carl, Eric, ...) -
I know several (many?) on this list know Stu better than I... so I
apologize if I sounded overly critical. I prefer Pamela's description
of him being *careless* with references as opposed to my own use of the
*honest*. I also admit that I do not know if he sees himself as a
rock-star... that is perhaps the default category I put people in who
are simultaneously *good*, *self-possessed* and *charismatic*. I
actually *like* most rock stars (within reason) even if I might not care
for their music.
As an aside... does anyone remember Chris Langton appearing in Rolling
Stone (CA 1990?)... I searched their archives and did not find any
references (nor on the internet at large?). I remember the article
including a sexed-up spread of him in front of a Connection Machine? I
suppose I could be hallucinating or have come from an alternate history?
I also smiled at your term "demigod" as I often use "Titans" to describe
the pantheon of my wife's sibling group... she is oldest of 8 *mostly*
high functioning, *very* charismatic, *definitely* self-possessed
siblings. They all revered their father who was a humble but
charismatic physics professor. None of them took up science per se,
though one has a PhD in psychology. I would not use *rock star* to
describe any of their self-image, though there is one who insists he
*is* Elvis... and sometimes we are tempted to believe him. There are
definitely characters right out of Greek, Roman, Norse, even Hindu
mythology in her family... My wife is Kali *and* Loki rolled into one I
think.
I have always been inspired by Kauffman's ideas as best I could
understand them, which has been highly variable, depending on the
circumstance. This says more about me than about Stu. I read his
lecture notes in the late-nineties... the ones which ultimately became
the core of _Investigations_ (or so it seemed to me). I had read _OofO_
and _At Home in the Universe_ previously. It may have been coincidence
or something stronger like kismet that I read Investigations interleaved
with my reading of Christopher Alexander's (Pattern Language fame)
_Notes on the Synthesis of Form_ with D'Arcy Thompson's _On Growth and
Form_ as backup reference. I was traveling lightly in New Zealand at
the time with none of my usual distractions nagging me. It was a month
of deep thought informed by Alexander and Kauffman equally.
My nature is to be guarded around people with significant charisma (and
me married into aforementioned pantheon!). I appreciate the need for
and the value of the persuasive and the self-confident, even in the
realm of science where ideas *by definition* must stand on their own.
There is value for those who can bring us to *want* to believe enough to
put in the hard work to believe things on their own merits.
Unfortunately that might be the dividing line between science and
Science(tm). I suppose I mistrust those who appear to be trying to
corner the franchise on Science(tm) in their neighborhood.
Nevertheless, I am *more* interested in Kauffman's ideas here and hope
that we will discuss them a bit?
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
