[sigh] All the effects are loopy effects. So if loopy effects are primary, then *all* the effects are primary.
On 11/29/21 11:23 AM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > This is the kind of work that Frank has done. We will hear from him > momentarily, I assume. As I understand it, such work can rank the efficacy > of a cause for each of its effects. But it does not tell you to care only > about the most effected effects. That is something you are doing. That’s > your frame. My frame, as a development/evolutionist blah blah tells me to > privilege effects that feed back on causes because these are the only kinds > of effects that in time can shape the development of a biological of > technological artifact. So loopy effects are “primary” to me. Perhaps I > should use your word “salient”, in this case. Yes, I think that would be > better. -- "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie." ☤>$ uǝlƃ .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
