Bah! If you are, as I am, a post-modernist, explanatory power reduces to evocative power. Whatever I can do to evoke a predictable response in the audience is adequate. Although I count myself a fan of Wittgenstein's STFU approach, I can't deny the power of those who just never STFU. (Witness the interminable chants at the various pro-this, anti-that rallies.) It's a kind of hypnosis ... a droning on and on until you win over your audience with tone and rhythm more so than content.
But w.r.t. Zweigneiderlassung, I'm currently enthralled with McShea and Brandon's concept of the ZFEL and "pure complexity", which (in my ignorance) disallows reliance on "branching" as a core concept. Simple counting seems more appropriate, especially since that makes sense to most people. I admit that McShea and Brandon seem to be relying fundamentally on some implicit spatial sense. But perhaps that's OK in this context? On 08/17/2018 03:21 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: > I always call it the Zweigneiderlassung. > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The explanatory power of all words is limited. See Wittgenstein. Wovon >> Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen. -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ 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
