Nick, Your welcome. Thanks for allowing me. I'm afraid I don't understand. Why can't enlightenment grow upon soil that enlightenment has succeeded on? Do you mind to explain? (Ever since primary school I was a bit slow to understand)
Pieter On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 21:13, <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pieter, > > > > Thanks for writing. I stipulate to your main point … that at least, in > some places things are getting better, and that enlightenment institutions > have made that happen. (My wife says I should work harder on my > stipulations.) BUT it does appear that “enlightenment” is kind of a weedy > species, if enlightenment cannot grow upon soil that enlightenment has > succeeded on. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Pieter Steenekamp > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 22, 2020 11:06 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Murdoch and Trump > > > > Nick, > > > > About your "if the Enlightenment has worked, it should not need defense, > right?" > > If people do not recognize that it has worked, is it wrong to point out > that it has worked? > > I'm not claiming there are no global problems - there certainly are. But > things are getting better, not? I've recently read that during the last > decade humanity has for the first time ever progressed to the point where > less than 10% of the global population lives in absolute poverty. > Using this example - there are still massive problems; 10 % lives in > absolute poverty. > > From wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty > > I quote from the same wikipedia page: > > "In public opinion surveys around the world, people surveyed tend to > incorrectly think that extreme poverty has not decreased." > > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > > Then about your "A system that “works” does not sow the seeds or its own > destruction, right?" > > I totally agree, it does not sow the seeds of its own destruction. Or does > it? I don't observe it sowing the seeds of its own destruction. > > > > Pieter > > > > > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 19:25, <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I èsoç want to agree with you Pieter. But there is a contradiction > here: if the Enlightenment has worked, it should not need defense, right? > A system that “works” does not sow the seeds or its own destruction, > right? > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Pieter Steenekamp > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:56 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Murdoch and Trump > > > > So much trouble? > > I'm an enthusiastic supporter of Steven Pinker's, I quote from > https://www.amazon.com/Enlightenment-Now-Science-Humanism-Progress/dp/0525427570 > : > "If you think the world is coming to an end, think again: people are > living longer, healthier, freer, and happier lives, and while our problems > are formidable, the solutions lie in the Enlightenment ideal of using > reason and science. > Is the world really falling apart? Is the ideal of progress obsolete? In > this elegant assessment of the human condition in the third millennium, > cognitive scientist and public intellectual Steven Pinker urges us to step > back from the gory headlines and prophecies of doom, which play to our > psychological biases. Instead, follow the data: In seventy-five > jaw-dropping graphs, Pinker shows that life, health, prosperity, safety, > peace, knowledge, and happiness are on the rise, not just in the West, but > worldwide. This progress is not the result of some cosmic force. It is a > gift of the Enlightenment: the conviction that reason and science can > enhance human flourishing. > Far from being a naïve hope, the Enlightenment, we now know, has worked. > But more than ever, it needs a vigorous defense. The Enlightenment project > swims against currents of human nature--tribalism, authoritarianism, > demonization, magical thinking--which demagogues are all too willing to > exploit. Many commentators, committed to political, religious, or romantic > ideologies, fight a rearguard action against it. The result is a corrosive > fatalism and a willingness to wreck the precious institutions of liberal > democracy and global cooperation. > With intellectual depth and literary flair, Enlightenment Now makes the > case for reason, science, and humanism: the ideals we need to confront our > problems and continue our progress." > > You might argue that it's not going to hold in the future, but I think > you're on shaky ground to argue we are in trouble now. > > Pieter > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 17:32, Merle Lefkoff <merlelefk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > This is the hubris that has got us into so much trouble! > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:00 AM Pieter Steenekamp < > piet...@randcontrols.co.za> wrote: > > Yep, I would go for this one. IMO we are involved in a collective process > where communication, reason, and action are indeed possible and > flourishing. Sure there are risks, climate change being one but not the > only one. Humanity is still very fragile and vulnerable to existential > risks like climate change, a big meteor or comet hitting the earth, a big > sun flare causing major damage to our electricity distribution networks, > new very dangerous, and others. The end could come before I finish this > sentence. But on the positive side if you observe the progress that has > happened, I am very optimistic that we are on the path towards a better > future. > I am a big fan of David Deutsch. Apart from him being part of having > developed the first quantum computer algorithm ( > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsch%E2%80%93Jozsa_algorithm) , his > views on infinite progress as per his book The Beginning of Infinity > resonates very well with me. > I quote about the book from wikipedia ( > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beginning_of_Infinity) > “Deutsch views the Enlightenment of the 18th century as near the beginning > of an infinite sequence of purposeful knowledge creation. Knowledge here > consists of information with good explanatory function that has proven > resistant to falsification. Any real process is physically possible to > perform provided the knowledge to do so has been acquired. The > Enlightenment set up the conditions for knowledge creation which disrupted > the static societies that previously existed. These conditions are the > valuing of creativity and the free and open debate that exposed ideas to > criticism to reveal those good explanatory ideas that naturally resist > being falsified due to their having basis in reality. Deutsch points to > previous moments in history, such as Renaissance Florence and > Plato's Academy in Golden Age Athens, where this process almost got > underway before succumbing to their static societies' resistance to change.” > > > > Pieter > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 01:05, Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> wrote: > > Nick writes: > > > > "So, in these sorts of situations, people tend to sort themselves out into > Dionysians and Apollonians, the former declaring that we're probably > fucked and we might as well stay warm, run around in our cars, and burn > all the coal we can, and the later declaring that we have a chance to get > it right and we should take our best shot." > > > > How about one step back: Are we involved in a collective process where > communication, reason, and action are possible? If we are not, then > democracy is nothing more than a temporary way to keep the peace and to > diffuse a need many have for (a feeling of) agency. It is a rearrangement > of deck chairs because soon the real shit will be coming down. If all > living creatures are just riding a wave, a process unfolding and going > wherever it must go, some may recognize they have no control and rationally > opt for the Dionysian approach. Other living things like koalas and > kangeroos and polar bears die by the millions, helpless and afraid. At > least the Dionysian gets the luxury of recognizing, "Yep, this is it." It > just depends on what kind of influence *can* work. At one point the > British Empire ruled over a quarter of the world. Now it isn't even > possible to get people to dispose of their plastic bottles properly. I > think the Apollonians better take charge ASAP, if that's what they are > going to do. > > > > Marcus > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣ < > geprope...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 21, 2020 2:49 PM > *To:* FriAM <friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Murdoch and Trump > > > > Nah. I reject the dichotomy. I consider myself both D and an A, but in > different domains. And I think it might be reasonable to time slice between > A & D. My sister's ex used to say "We play hard and we work hard" ... > indicating that they were both D & A, maybe even simultaneously, depending > on how you interpret that. > > The more interesting thing about AGW is whether or not one *must* be a > believer or a "skeptic" [†], and nothing in between. As a dyed in the wool > agnostic, I neither believe nor am I a "skeptic", from gun control to > abortion to AGW. I also don't like Britney Spears' music. But if she showed > up at my door and asked me to ... oh, I don't know ... create a > visualization package for her music, I would definitely do it, which would > mean listening to her music a LOT for days on end. You don't have to agree > with a mission in order to contribute to the mission. > > So, it seems to me to be *unreasonable* to run around complaining about > how so many people are AGW believers. So what? If you don't want to work on > the problem, go work on something else. It's just weird how the "skeptics" > are so obsessed. E.g. > > https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg > > > [†] In quotes to indicate that many people abuse the term. I am a skeptic, > but not a "skeptic" ... if you grok the gist. > > On 1/21/20 12:17 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > > While I am "in", it seems to me that a distinction is beginning to > evolve here between whether a reasonable person CAN doubt Anthropogenic > Global Warming (AGW) and whether such a person SHOULD doubt AGW. I think > reasonable people could argue whether we are in a period of AGW (400yrs), a > period of global cooling (11,000 yrs) or a spectacularly fragile and > geologically unprecedented period of climate stability (also about > 11kyrs). So, in these sorts of situations, people tend to sort themselves > out into Dionysians and Apollonians, the former declaring that we're > probably fucked and we might as well stay warm, run around in our cars, > and burn all the coal we can, and the later declaring that we have a chance > to get it right and we should take our best shot. I am, as you all know, > with the Apollonians. We are, after all, the choosing species, the species > that can knowingly chart it's own path. So we “should” choose; in fact, we > /will/ chose, even if we only do so by > > choosing not to choose. > > > > > > > > But it's clear, now why the debate is so intractable. The debate > between Dionysians and Apollonians has been in progress for centuries, so > it's no surprise that we are struggling with it now. > > > > > > > > I hear some of you formulating an argument that whether we are D’s or > A’s should be determined by the shape of the hazard space. As a > collective, I think we FRIAMMERS are particularly well positioned and > qualified to have that discussion, and I hope it will continue. > > -- > ☣ 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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > > > > -- > > Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. > President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy > emergentdiplomacy.org > > Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA > > merlelefk...@gmail.com <merlelef...@gmail.com> > mobile: (303) 859-5609 > skype: merle.lelfkoff2 > > twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff > > ============================================================ > 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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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 archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
