Glen - > But your larger point is well-taken. Sometimes, the full swath of (high > dimensional) exploratory search is more appropriate than low-dimensional > reducing collectivism of exploitation. But when and how do we force the > system into an anarchist mode of exploration?
thanks for this quick-apprehension-reduction-response of/to my point... my work has evolved over the last decade to include/embrace work in ensemble-steering... growing out of (more) simple analysis of high-dimensional data (often generated by simulation models). This informs my interest/awareness in the evolving socioeconomicpoliticalregulatoryrhetorical system/milieu/landscape that we live (participate) in (co-create)... In the (recent) past I have referenced Tensor Decomposition and Self Organizing Map techniques we are exploring which I agree (re: offline exchanges) are a bit too esoteric/rarified/specialized to be introducing into everyday discussion without a LOT more background. However *both* are techniques for dimensionality *ordering* which supports *reduction* through simple thresholding and vector projection. Single-issue voters are the ultimate in dimension reducers (via a thresholding to 1) and stable genii like the Donald seem to have a good intuition (or suite of more formal techniques?) for game-driving these people into voting for him based on the illusion/promise/hope that *their* single-issue (abortion, xenophobia, homophobia, extractive-industry-of-choice-expansion, Stock Market temperature) prospects will be maximized. The Trump Train has carloads of single-issue voters but it also has a huge population of those who have comfortably/happily reduced a handful of issues into a single-measure nominally described as Right-Wing or Republican or Conservative, even though this projection might only superficially look like the same labels of say 40 (Reagan) or even 10 (Bush II) years ago. Certainly not 150 (Lincoln). And of course, it seems not to matter to most of those riding (fueling?) his train that the Engineer doesn't personally believe-in or demonstrate most of the features in their preferred feature-vector... they are just happy that he (currently?) presents a high-magnitude vector (build-the-wall, lock-her-up, drill-baby-drill, punch-em-in-the-face, grab-em-by-the-hoohoo, ec.) that seems to project well onto theirs (christian values, social conservatism, financial conservatism, etc.) while ignoring how poorly his crypto-language/behaviour might reduce in an entirely antithetical way (cut-tax-and-still spend, corporate/wealthy welfare, squeeze the have-nots, etc...) You ask: "But when and how do we force the system into an anarchist mode of exploration?" I don't know the term off the top of my head, but I think there is one which fits a similar role to that of annealing (both in materials science and computer simulation) where the dimensionality is "pulsed" or "phased". To some extent, I think that is what our political system (used to?) provides... forcing us to pull back and look at the big picture, then focus in on a subset of the problem at hand and work hard to "get 'er done". This is where I think *good* congresspeople might excel when they are acting properly as *statespeople*. I personally do this myself *all the time*. In the spirit of your froth of homunculii, I allow my own to form coalitions/factions to cajole me on one topic or another until the dead horse is reduced to dust but then pull them back and require them to acknowledge one another's best points (oscillate from straw-man to steel-man arguments to use your terminology?) I would like to live in (or recognize where I do) a world where I have more company in this, where the goal isn't *always* to collapse (reduce?) dimensionality. My conspiratorial innuendo in the original response on this thread is that (collectively if not individually) the "powers that be" understand this very well and manipulate it (premature reduction/collapse of dimensionality) to their own benefit. - Steve > On 2/20/20 10:07 AM, Steven A Smith wrote: >> What *of* a more >> sophisticated dimensional analysis (as Marcus put the name on it) of our >> sociopolitics? Are we really (individually and collectively) that dumb >> that we can only think (or at least argue) in one dimension? Or is it >> in the best interest of "the powers that be" that we remain confined to >> that (over)simplification of "life, the universe and everything"? >> >> Trump has tumbled the Republican party off-axis in a certain way and >> seems to have found another somewhat stable mode which paradoxically may >> have actually created the conditions for Bernie (and Elizabeth to a >> lesser extent) to tumble the Democrats into yet-another stable spin. >> Or to extend the metaphor, has he just "tumbled our gyros" in a way that >> will never recover? Maybe it is time to quit watching the artificial >> horizon (polling, punditry, ???), look out the window and recover "by >> the seat of our pants"? ============================================================ 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
