Well, most people say that the moon is the prime cause of the tides. --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Mon, Jul 20, 2020, 2:05 PM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, frank, for that affirmation. > > > > I am sitting here, on this hot day, looking at the tree across the street, > and saying to myself (The Behaviorist) am I REALLY going to get away with > telling Glen he cannot say, “That tree is causing the yard to be shaded.” > Something not right about that. Modulo obsessive thinking. > > > > 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:* Monday, July 20, 2020 1:59 PM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] better simulating actual FriAM > > > > Nick, you are correct in saying that causation is a relation between > events. The most useful definition of causation that we found in our > statistical causal reasoning research (viz Spirtes, Glymour, and Scheines) > was event A is a cause of event B if the occurrence of A is followed by a > change in the probability density over the possible values of B. Modulo > obsessional tweaking. > > > > Frank > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020, 1:39 PM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Nick (to Jon) > Re Gen Phen: That's the Whole Point, here. There are two different > distinctions, here, one apparently arising form computation (?) and one > arising from biology. Glen originally mentioned a GENerator/ PHENomenon > distinction which seems to be the broader of the two and does not forbid > downward causation. More recently we have been talking about the > GENotype/PHENotype distinction which is narrower and does - > historically-forbid downward causation. So, I think we need to spell the > words out completely from now on, so we know which game we are playing. > > Your reference to language games raises the question of what sort of "game" > are we playing when we talk about causation. One rule of that game, I > think, which I may have violated myself in this discussion, is that things > cannot cause things. Only events can cause events. The reason is that > the > notion of cause involves temporal order and things (as opposed to the > arrival of things or the placement of things or the removal things) cannot > be in a temporal order. I am wondering if adherence to this discipline > might make the whole problem of downward causation disappear? So, the > addition of the 5th stick (an event) to previous four sticks CAUSES the > other 4 sticks not to rotate (an event) and CAUSES the structure to be > strong (another event). Notice that this formulation appears to forbid us > to say that the constraints on the rotation of the other four sticks > provided by the fifth stick CAUSES the strengthening of the structure > because those two events are temporally inextricable. What IS the relation > between those two facts if not a causal one? I think I would argue that > it's a constitutive relation; ie, the rotational constraints constitute the > greater strength of the square with the fifth stick. > > Nick > thompnicks...@gmail.com > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > Jon to Nick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 11:07 AM > To: friam@redfish.com > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] better simulating actual FriAM > > Maybe I am misremembering (which clearly happens), but didn't the > discussion > of gen-phen-like maps arise in the context of goal-function distinctions? > In > this latter class, we included the thermostat system where constraining > systems to Weismann's doctrine would not be meaningful. Clearly, in the > goal-function system, an individual that changes the thermostat dial > because > they prefer the house to be at 60 degrees rather than 80 degrees (a > variation on function) performs downwardly to affect the tolerance of the > piece of metal or mercury switch (a variation on goal). Are we breaking the > semantic game by now demanding that our admissable gen-phen-like maps > preserve Weismann's doctrine? I understood Glen's evocation to not be so > constrained. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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/ >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . 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/