Complex system and emergence reached their hype peak around 2,000. The bubble burst for emergence <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=emergence&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cemergence%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bemergence%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEmergence%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEMERGENCE%3B%2Cc0>, but complex system <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=complex+system&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Ccomplex%20system%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bcomplex%20system%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BComplex%20System%3B%2Cc0> seems to be hanging on. Unfortunately, Google's NGram viewer only goes up to 2008.
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:17 PM Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: > Dear All, > > > > I wonder the extent to which you would all agree that there is a bit of a > complexity bubble: i.e., if you know the lingo, then you can understand the > questions; if you don't know the lingo, then you can't understand what > complexity people are on about. So, one kind of project a group like us > could work on is breaking out of the bubble. That would require putting > the complexity problem in a form that any ordinary mortal can understand. > Here’s my attempt: I think what you are up to is coming up with a general > theory of creation, more general even than natural selection. You want to > offer a theory that accounts for the emergence of complex structures (*sensu > Thompsoni*) in the universe. Now that’s a program that anybody outside > the bubble could understand. > > > > How wrong am I about that? > > > > 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: Thursday, June 08, 2017 6:39 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] tools, trollers, and language > > > > > > I think you and I on the same page. My first thought (before the > concept-mapping tools) was to collaboratively develop an ontology so that > we could all talk about the same things. But my guess is that would just > cause even more hemming and hawing over terms. Regardless of tools, > someone needs to run point. If there's a lead author and the other > participants can "get behind" that author's objective, then it would work. > > > > > > On 06/08/2017 03:05 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: > > > I have found concept mapping tools to be helpful in this context, but > usually in live-brainstorming sessions... with one (or more) operators > clicking and typing and dragging and connecting while others chatter out > loud, then shifting the mouse/keyboard(s) to another(s). > > > > > > I know we have a mind-mapping ( I prefer concept-mapping) tool developer > on the list... I'm blanking his name, though I know he has been active off > and on! I hope he catches this and pitches in. I believe he was heading > toward web-enabled, simultaneous editing capabilities. I did some tests > and provided some feedback on an early version a few years ago.. > > > > > > My only significant experience in this is with CMAPtools and a few > others driven by various project-lead's preferences, but never really > adopted by myself. > > > > > > I was in the process of developing some more formal tools with UNM for > the NSF a few years ago, based on formalisms being developed by Tim > Goldsmith (dept. Psychology) at UNM. The presumption WAS (IS) that we all > have reserved lexicons and for a collaborative group to develop a common > one, there has to be a lot of discussion and negotiation. Our example was > a group of climate change scientists who (un)surprisingly used identical > terms in very similar contexts with very different intentions and meanings > in some cases. It isn't too surprising when you realize that an ocean > scientist and an atmospheric scientist are very interested in many of the > same physical properties, but with different emphasis and within different > regimes. Pressure, density, humidity, salinity, vorticity all seem to > have pretty clear meanings to any scientist using them, but the relative > importance and interaction between them has different implications for each > group. > > > > > > Needless to say, we didn't finish the tools before the funding ran out. > This is now nearly 8 years old work... the ideas area still valid but > without a patron and without SME's to "test on" it is hard to push such > tools forward. My part included building the equivalent of what you call > "mind maps" from the differing lexical elements, floating in N-space and > "morphing" from each individual (or subgroup's) perspective to some kind of > common perspective... with the intention of helping each individual or > subgroup appreciate the *different* perspective of the others. > > > > > > This is modestly related to my work in "faceted ontologies" (also > currently not under active development) where "multiple lexicons" is > replaced by "multiple ontologies" or in both cases, the superposition of > multiple lexicons/ontologies. > > > > > > I haven't worked with Joslyn since that 2007? paper... but we *tried* a > joint project with PNNL/NREL a couple of years ago, but it failed due to > inter-laboratory politics I think. He's an equally brilliant/oblique > character as you... take that for what it is worth! > > > > > > I liked Frank's double-dog-dare to you. I think that is one of the > good things you bring out in this list, all kinds of others' feistiness! > It was also good that you could both call it for what it was. It makes me > want to read Kohut... I have special reasons for trying to apprehend > alternate self-psychology models right now, though from your's and Frank's > apparent avoidance(/dismissal?) of Kahut and my immediate phonetic > slip-slide to Camus, I'm a little leery. > > > > -- > > ☣ 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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > ============================================================ > 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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ 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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove