The real "issue" is that we're all a mess. The surprise isn't that attempts to change things for the better fail, the miracle is that anything works at all.
The more we collectively learn, the more ignorant we all individually become, and there isn't any *authority* that can tell us which part of our ignorance needs the most attention. Being smarter just gives us greater potential for being ignorant, there's more stuff that we could have learned but haven't. I started watching the Hamming lectures, again, yesterday. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2FF649D0C4407B30 He stands up there in front of his Naval Postgraduate School class, does a back-of-the-envelope calculation of what's implied by a doubling time of 17 years for the sum of scientific knowledge, and says (paraphrased from memory): in 40 years one of you will be Chief of Staff, and there will be 5 times as much scientific knowledge relevant to your work as there is today, that's quite a problem. I found the book of the lectures, http://worrydream.com/refs/Hamming-TheArtOfDoingScienceAndEngineering.pdf, the printed continuation to the episode above is: What is my answer to this dilemma? One answer is you must concentrate on > fundamentals, at least what > you think at the time are fundamentals, and also develop the ability to > learn new fields of knowledge when > they arise so you will not be left behind, as so many good engineers are > in the long run. In the position I > found myself in at the Laboratories, where I was the only one locally who > seemed (at least to me) to have a > firm grasp on computing, I was forced to learn numerical analysis, > computers, pretty much all of the > physical sciences at least enough to cope with the many different > computing problems which arose and whose > solution could benefit the Labs, as well as a lot of the social and some > the biological sciences. Thus I am a > veteran of learning enough to get along without at the same time devoting > all my effort to learning new > topics and thereby not contributing my share to the total effort of the > organization. The early days of > learning had to be done while I was developing and running a computing > center. You will face similar > problems in your career as it progresses, and, at times, face problems > which seem to overwhelm you. What are the fundamentals of our social-political-economic life together? If we removed the influence of money from politics, would everything suddenly be clear? No, it would still be 5 times more confusing than it was 39 years ago. "If we could just make _those_ idiots shut up" is not a solution, because we are all objectively idiots and 5 times more idiotic than we were 39 years ago. If you squint, you might wonder if the Mayday PAC is all that different from the Republican efforts to disenfranchise the poor, they're both focused on solving the problem "why is my side not in control?" by removing the other side from the game. Your side is not in control because you're idiots and you have no persuasive ideas about what to do, not because the idiots on the other side are richer or more numerous. -- rec -- On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Owen Densmore <o...@backspaces.net> wrote: > Maybe the best comparison is the Arab Spring, where there was so much > hope, and such a dismal result. > > Lessig's Freedom From Pacs Spring is likely doomed to the same end, but I > hope not. We need to remember evolution is a part of Mayday's future: > figuring out what works and what doesn't, and responding quickly. > > -- Owen > > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Owen Densmore <o...@backspaces.net> > wrote: > >> I think its going to be quite a while before we see the impact of Mayday >> and be able to judge it's "success". >> >> But single issue is definitely a problem if not really, really well >> defined. >> >> For example, can Mayday's approach readjust the time folks spend on >> getting funding? You'd think they'd want the congress/senate to have more >> time to actually do something. >> >> If not, maybe they should have a different goal: unblocking the roadblock. >> >> -- Owen >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:14 AM, glen <g...@ropella.name> wrote: >> >>> >>> We're starting to see the unintended consequences that we were trying to >>> suss out with our "explanations for why one should do nothing". >>> >>> >>> http://irregulartimes.com/2014/09/10/did-the-single-issue-mayday-pac-fund-canvassers-on-obamacare-gun-rights-and-global-warming/ >>> >>> Although it's probably too late, those who care might step in and >>> suggest to mayday.us that "single issue" campaigns are part of the >>> problem, not part of the solution... if "complexity" means anything, it >>> means that. >>> >>> >>> On 07/01/2014 09:22 PM, Robert J. Cordingley wrote: >>> > Dare I say, as expected, offered an opportunity to actual do >>> something, many (the 91%?) keep explaining (debate back and forth) why one >>> should do nothing. >>> > >>> > With all the talent and expertise on this list, surely someone could >>> help Larry Lessig succeed with his campaign? It's complicated/complex. >>> Who's up to it? Remember, this was inspired < >>> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-aaron-swartz-helped-inspire-lawrence-lessigs-mayday-pac> >>> by Aaron Swartz. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella >>> Lobsterbacks attack the town again >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> 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 >> >> >> > > ============================================================ > 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 >
============================================================ 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
