Nick, I was a math major at Berkeley and had no contact with the Psychology Department. Consulting my carefully preserved Catalog from that era I see he was a full professor of Psychology.
Frank --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:34 AM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think you were at Berkeley when he was Chairman of the Department. > > > > N > > > > 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 *Frank Wimberly > *Sent:* Saturday, May 30, 2020 9:30 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games > > > > I did not know David Kresh. Did he say that? Very similar to what I said. > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > > > On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:27 AM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Frank, > > > > You also KNEW David Krech, right? > > > > > > If I say that {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} is a right triangle, then that’s what > a right triangle is (for my research) and there is nothing more to say > about it. > > > > You have been spending too much time with mathematicians. Oh. Wait a > minute. YOU ARE ONE! How could you not S spend lots of time with one? > Even on my account, you have privileged access to the mind of a > mathematician. > > > > Doesn’t every mathematical proof begin with > > Let X = [AFTISII] > > > > From which it follows that: > > > > X = [AFTISII] > > > > At which point, Hywel says calmly, “Math is ok, but sometimes you need to > know what you are talking about”. > > > > Where is Hywel when we need him. DARN! > > > > N > > > > > > 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 *Frank Wimberly > *Sent:* Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:59 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games > > > > Excellent, Jon. > > > > On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right > triangle, here's a classic one > > > > {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} > > > > and here's a manifold > > > > {(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of > S^2. > > > > Note these are not physical objects. > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <jonzing...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Frank, Steve, > > > > My favored approach is to say that *space is like a manifold*. > > For me, space is a *thing* and a manifold is an *object*. The former > > I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to > > learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone > > (consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning). > > I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but > > I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place- > > holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH > > manifolds are fully *objectified*, they exist by virtue of their > > formality. Any meaningful question *about a manifold* itself > > is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their > > own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we > > treat space *as if it were* a manifold. Just my two cents. > > > > At the beginning of MacLane's *Geometrical Mechanics,* (a book > > I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy > > to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with '*The slogan is: Kinetic* > > *energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space*'. What a baller. > > > > Glen, > > > > I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing > > the argument to a *snowclone*. Because the title of the thread > > actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may > > have missed your point about *xyz,* please allow me this question. > > Do you feel that *snowclones* are necessarily templates for making > > metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different? > > > > Jon > > > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . > ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . > ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . > ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
