Yes, and I sent you a brief description of freshman year at Carnegie Tech in1961-62.
--- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Fri, Sep 23, 2022, 1:24 PM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > Did you guys not get this? > > > > Nick Thompson > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > *From:* thompnicks...@gmail.com <thompnicks...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2022 2:59 PM > *To:* 'Mike Bybee' <mikeby...@earthlink.net>; 'Eric Charles' < > eric.phillip.char...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* 'Jon Zingale' <jonzing...@gmail.com>; friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* RE: Nick's monism kick > > > > I think this comes very close to our discussion on operationism. My > response to eric’s challenge on that score was his “quantity” argument, > which he himself disavowed. The attempt to identify a concept by a single > operation or even by operations within a single paradigm is operationism, > which I, as a pragmatist, condemn. However, the sum of all conceivable > operations is the pragmaticist “meaning” of the concept. Now, in > disavowing this “Quantitative” distinction between operationism and > pragmatism, Eric seems to be reaching for some “essence” which is aside > from all operations that might flow from adoption of the concept. I wrote > you both about this, and neither has replied. > > > > Now, as to the dialogue. I would be proud of the student by the fact that > she has carried anything from the psycho building to the chemistry > building. Most students go through a complete brainwashing when they pass > out into the quadrangle. Finally, I would be proud of her holding her > ground with the lab tech, even when such heavy artillery is brought to bear > on her. > > > > As to the substance, I find the Lab Tech’s response oddly incoherent. > First he appears to ding her for her flat affect. “Look, kid, some > consequences are more… um… consequential than others. Don’t you feel the > heat of that explosion?” On that point, I agree with him. Emotional > consequences are consequences. We could do experiments on them. > > > > But then he seems to be dinging her for not understanding that the dire > consequences arise from molecular events rather than from bad lab > technique, as if they become more consequention when they are understood in > atomic terms. As if their “dangerousness” is attached to their > “atomicness”. This argument felt to me like some sort of creepy > essentialism, I and wanted no part of it. I would have been even more > proud of the student if she had responded, “Respectfully, sir, that makes > no sense to me at all. What is truly dangerous here, what I must be > steadfastly warned against, is mixing these two substances under particular > circumstances, or even composing a mixture that might, though inattention, > find itself under those circumstances. True, atomic principles might help > me anticipate dangers with other solutions, but the danger is in the > explosion, not in the atoms. > > ! > > In my year at Harvard, two of my classmates were thrown out for a > chemistry experiment pursued in their dorm rooms that resulted in an > explosion. The students defended themselves before the Dean (my uncle, as > it happened), on the ground that the two chemicals involved *could not > have exploded! *The chemistry department agreed. Nonetheless, the Dean > threw they out, but with a Deanly wink encouraging application for > re-admission in the following year. > > > > Have I answered your question? > > > > n > > > > Nick Thompson > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > *From:* Mike Bybee <mikeby...@earthlink.net> > *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2022 1:03 PM > *To:* 'Nicholas Thompson' <thompnicks...@gmail.com>; 'Eric Charles' < > eric.phillip.char...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* 'Jon Zingale' <jonzing...@gmail.com>; friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* RE: Nick's monism kick > *Importance:* High > > > > > > > > I’ve been waiting for Nick to weigh in on this. > > Is it about time for the new academic conversation to begin? > > I think Eric’s imagined a wonderful dialogue here. > > First, it’s in the context of chemistry, Peirce’s paradigm for > how-to-do-philosophy, so this makes Peirce’s point perfectly. > > Second, Eric has situated it as a discussion between a lab > tech and a student, not between a chemistry professor and a student. That > makes the whole thing far more poignant—but makes the whole tension between > the Peirce’s levels of discourse so in-your-face as well. > > Anyway, > > I’m really curious to see how Nick will address Eric’s > adventitious example, and I don’t want this to get lost in the autumn > leaves! > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Nicholas Thompson > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 30, 2022 10:47 AM > *To:* Eric Charles <eric.phillip.char...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* M. D. Bybee <mikeby...@earthlink.net>; Jon Zingale < > jonzing...@gmail.com>; friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* Re: Nick's monism kick > > > > I am at the moment living in a remote colony of rich peoples shacks, Hence > no Internet. > > > > But I like the question so well I am forwarding it to the list. I will get > back to you when I do not have to thumb my answer. > > N > > Sent from my Dumb Phone > > > On Aug 30, 2022, at 11:27 AM, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.char...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Nick, > > You have been asking for "an assignment", and I think I finally thought of > a good one for you. (And I think it might spur some interesting discussion, > which is why others are copied here.) > > > > Imagine that you are still teaching at Clark, and that you have been > tentatively including your current monism more and more in some of the > classes. When walking by the Chemistry labs, you recognize the voice of an > enthusiastic student you had last quarter,, and you start to ease drop. The > conversation is as follows: > > Lab tech: Be careful with that! If it mixes with the potassium solution, > it can become explosive, we would have to evacuate the building. > Student: What do you mean? > Lab tech: If the potassium mixes with chlorides at the right ratio, then > we are *probably* safe while it is in solution, but if it dries up, it is a > hard-core explosive and it wouldn't take much to level the whole building. > We would have to take that threat seriously, and evacuate the building > until I made the solution safe. > Student: Oh, a predictions about future experiences, I like those! > Lab tech: What? I'm talking about a real danger, and I need you to be > careful so it doesn't happen. > Student: Yes, exactly, you believe that those experiences will follow if > certain experiences happen now. > Lab tech: Huh? No. I'm telling you how the physical atoms work. I mean... > yes... the part about the explosion is something that would happen under > certain circumstances in the future, but the chemical reaction and the > damage it could cause are well known facts. Look, man, if you aren't here > to learn how to be safe with the chemicals, then maybe you should just > leave. > Student: Wait, seriously? You aren't some kind of *materialist* are you?!? > You know anything we could talk about are *just* experiences, right? It's > experiences all the way down! > > Listening in, you can tell that the student is taking this line based on > your influence, because it sounds like things they were kinda-sorta > starting to grock in your class. > > How do you feel hearing that? Proud, worried, confused? Does it sound like > the student was getting the message you intended, or has the intended > message gone awry? Would you have said something similar to the Lab Tech > under the same circumstances? > > > > > > > > > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (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/ >
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (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/