N -
I read this as "Glen being Glen" which I approve of...
... that doesn't mean you don't get credit for inflicting your own inner
vocabulary (or simply the lexicon of your profession?) on us...
Some of us appreciate what might otherwise seem idiosyncratic.
I had to parse this one very carefully and seek references (especially
for the /tu quoque /) but that is (to use a golf metaphor of all damned
things) /par for the course/!
- S
PS.. I had three ravens fledge in the cottonwood by my house this summer
and I thought of you!
On 9/9/16 8:18 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
Glen,
You wrote:
*There's no doubt that any form of inference done by humans is subject
to premature registration or even apophenia. But the inverted claim,
that _all_ registration is premature (or imaginary) is way too strong,
and perhaps a case of tu quoque.*
Narcissist that I am, I assume you are punishing me for all the weird
language I have inflicted on the list over the last 12 years. I
humbly acknowledge the punishment.
Now: Could you explain what you meant? (};-)]
Thanks,
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of ?glen?
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 2:51 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] speaking of analytics
There's no doubt that any form of inference done by humans is subject
to premature registration or even apophenia. But the inverted claim,
that _all_ registration is premature (or imaginary) is way too strong,
and perhaps a case of tu quoque.
On 09/09/2016 11:42 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Fine, “statistical inference” then.
>
> *From:*Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Nick
> Thompson
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2016 12:38 PM
> *To:* 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> <friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] speaking of analytics
>
> And data “mining” is a metaphor.
>
> Now people claim to use metaphors “metaphorically”, by which they
mean that they mean nothing by them. But it is my “teery”* (and it is
all mine) that nobody uses a metaphor but that hizr thinking is
influenced by it. The influence can be inexplicit, in which case the
user is blind to its effects on himmr, or explicit, in which case the
user’s imagination is enhanced by its use and less likely to be misled
by its misuse. I would like to explore this “teery” using “Data
Mining” as an example. How does thinking of data as encased in a
non-dynamic subterranean matrix shape our (your) thinking for good or
ill?
--
␦glen?
============================================================
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
