Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[Steven A Smith]

Glen/Marcus -

Once again, a nicely chewy (if mildly pithy) exchange here:

To try to summarize my own responses...   I think Glen is suggesting 
(via Aaronson quotes/references) that some folks believe that by 
invoking an aphorism of a well-respected/famous person and finding fault 
with it (sneering?) that they thereby gain some of the power that person 
has (socially?) not unlike a cannibal-warrior eating a vanquished 
opponent's organ of choice. Or racing for pink slips?


As for "Apex Predator of the Signalling World", I assume that the 
allusion is to replacing the actual discussion at hand in an arguement 
or investigation with a meta-discussion, a superset of ad-hominism?   
FWIW I've just been watching Hugh Laurie's new (to me) role as Dr. 
Chance (Neuropsychologist cum Vigilante) in the Hulu series of that name 
(Chance), who is doing his own version of Walter White-style breaking 
bad, and there are a lot of parallels to what I *think* you are pointing 
out here.


Regarding this Robinson fellow, he does *seem to be* a lot more credible 
(or grounded, or ???) than most of his brethren in arms.   Given that 
both of you have a strong contrarian streak of your own, I want to be 
careful in observing that "contrarianism" is one of the stronger signals 
(in my experience) for conspiracy whackadoodlery.  Just as with cinema, 
food, literary and really any form of criticism it is generally easier 
to let someone else do the heavy lifting of building something up and 
then just come along and chisel away at some of the weak spots and claim 
to have done something equally worthy (or meaningful or utilitarian?), 
not unlike the original point made by Aaronson above.    Another 
signature element in my experience is strong examples of confirmation 
bias.   "mainstream science" is also guilty of same, and perhaps that is 
what "alt science" legitimately has a claim against them (us?) for, is 
that there are *structural* biases built into funding and 
peer-review/publication.


That said, there has to be some useful "corollary" to the idea of "just 
because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!".   
Maybe "just because you recognize and call out the biases of that which 
is mainstream doesn't make YOUR contrarian biases any more legitimate"?


I'm not personally that focused on cancer itself, but am generally 
interested in human metabolism and the effects of the "diseases of 
affluence" that our first-world lives lead us to.  I find this to be an 
interesting microcosm of the global scale issues such as global climate 
change, travel-aggravated-epidemics, and diversity collapse.


I found it acutely interesting that Robinson (and colleagues) would play 
the "hedge" of "if there is climate change, it seems to be good for 
humanity!".   Why can't they take those two issues fully independently 
and corroborate the "mainstream"s observations about the anthropogenic 
effects they CAN observe and then maybe (or not) make their own case for 
evaluating (not cherry picking) models of ways that might "help" the 
biosphere (or even the anthroposphere)?   I may be being sloppy, but it 
seems to me that there is a strong correlation between mere "contrarian" 
and a more insidious "strong conflation".


This leaves me wondering if there are natural language processing tools 
suitable for identifying these kinds of structural failures in written 
discussion/arguement?   Maybe Google is doing this already and using the 
results to mine what is superficially fringe/crackpot/pseudo-science for 
the real thing (revolutionary science marginalized by the mainstream?)


Carry On,

 - Steve



On 10/12/17 4:25 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

Like upsides to global warming, perhaps there are benefits to the irrationality 
of scientists, like Robinson's and others'.
It suggests that science is an activity or an algorithm, that can be conducted 
in parallel with arbitrary if closely-held beliefs.
But I'm cynical.  I'm inclined to think the scientific method is just a weapon 
in the hands of a sufficiently wacko person to pummel the world into a form 
they think they can manage or profit from.   Better have more non-wacko people 
with the same skills to balance things out.   Sure, there is herd behavior in 
all kinds of people, even the science-policy elites in Washington.   Is there 
some harm being done by them other than to direct money in a worthy direction 
that happens not to be to him?   The contrarian needs to be clever to navigate 
these things and do more than complain.

Marcus

"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our 
humanity." - Albert Einstein
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 4:01 PM
To: FriAM 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

Yep.  One of my homunculi does that to his brethren.  This came out today:

   The Grandfather Of Alt-Science
   

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[gⅼеɳ ☣]

On 10/12/2017 03:25 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 
>>   The Grandfather Of Alt-Science
>>   https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-grandfather-of-alt-science/
> 
> Like upsides to global warming, perhaps there are benefits to the 
> irrationality of scientists, like Robinson's and others'.
> It suggests that science is an activity or an algorithm, that can be 
> conducted in parallel with arbitrary if closely-held beliefs.  
> But I'm cynical.  I'm inclined to think the scientific method is just a 
> weapon in the hands of a sufficiently wacko person to pummel the world into a 
> form they think they can manage or profit from.   Better have more non-wacko 
> people with the same skills to balance things out.   Sure, there is herd 
> behavior in all kinds of people, even the science-policy elites in 
> Washington.   Is there some harm being done by them other than to direct 
> money in a worthy direction that happens not to be to him?   The contrarian 
> needs to be clever to navigate these things and do more than complain.

I agree for the most part, especially given the false reification surrounding 
the scientific method.  Woo peddlers and conspiracy theorists rely on the real 
hermeneutical depth of real science as cover for their rhetoric.  The real 
benefit of thinking seriously about Robinson (or other pseudoscience like 
acupuncture, or even things like informal fallacies) is as a foil for learning 
what *to* do, from examples of what *not* to do.  If the Robinsons of the world 
were earnest failures, they'd be wholesome contributors to science.  But 
because they're deluded, blind to their failures, it is difficult to learn from 
them.

This post makes the argument nicely:

  The Case for Contrarianism
  http://quillette.com/2017/10/10/the-case-for-contrarianism/

from the post:
> So even if Gilley’s paper does as little to support its conclusion as its 
> critics seem to think, it nonetheless might have provided a valuable service 
> to the anti-colonial literature, by making a case at all. That would provide 
> anti-colonial academics something to point to and say: “Here is the best case 
> for colonialism available. It’s very bad, and so it’s reasonable to conclude 
> that the case against colonialism is much stronger than the case for 
> colonialism.” This helps actually to buttress the field’s theoretical 
> foundations, especially as a pedagogical matter. Nor will it do for critics 
> to say simply that the paper could find a place in a discipline with 
> different foundations. If we hope to achieve with our intellectual inquiry 
> even roughly objective knowledge of reality, we must go beyond having a field 
> that assumes P and a field that assumes not-P – we must investigate whether 
> or not P is actually true.

-- 
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[Marcus Daniels]

Like upsides to global warming, perhaps there are benefits to the irrationality 
of scientists, like Robinson's and others'.
It suggests that science is an activity or an algorithm, that can be conducted 
in parallel with arbitrary if closely-held beliefs.  
But I'm cynical.  I'm inclined to think the scientific method is just a weapon 
in the hands of a sufficiently wacko person to pummel the world into a form 
they think they can manage or profit from.   Better have more non-wacko people 
with the same skills to balance things out.   Sure, there is herd behavior in 
all kinds of people, even the science-policy elites in Washington.   Is there 
some harm being done by them other than to direct money in a worthy direction 
that happens not to be to him?   The contrarian needs to be clever to navigate 
these things and do more than complain.

Marcus

"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our 
humanity." - Albert Einstein
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 4:01 PM
To: FriAM 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

Yep.  One of my homunculi does that to his brethren.  This came out today:

  The Grandfather Of Alt-Science
  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-grandfather-of-alt-science/

Anyone whose spent any time in Oregon knows this whack job.  And my apex 
predator of the signaling world homunculus yells at me to hate him as the 
crackpot he clearly is, as well as his neolithic social postions.  But *most* 
of my other homunculi have immense respect for someone who hacks their own path 
through the thicket, going to bat for every wannabe crackpot or inventor who 
spends their spare time breathing solder smoke in the basement or suffers 
regular chemical burns because they care more about their objective than 
safety.  Yes, DIY biology is dangerous.  But hey, we can't all work in the 
belly of some bureaucratic leviathan.


On 10/12/2017 02:44 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> "Apex predator of the signaling world."  
> 
> Cute, know it well.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:37 PM
> To: FriAM 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again
> 
> I know.  I just thought it was an interesting post.  That we'd recently 
> discussed Feynman was only a segue. I could also have used Russell as the 
> segue, since Marcus quoted him in our thread.
> 
> The 1st part of Aaronson's post re: Gowers is more interesting than the later 
> stuff.
> 
> On 10/12/2017 02:26 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>> I took issue not with Feynman as a person ...
> 
>> https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488
>>
>>> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
>>> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner 
>>> product with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand 
>>> above him, in the same way that set theory transcends and stands above 
>>> arithmetic by constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t 
>>> thereby become your achievements.
> 
> 
> --
> ☣ gⅼеɳ
> 
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove 
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> 

--
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[gⅼеɳ ☣]

Yep.  One of my homunculi does that to his brethren.  This came out today:

  The Grandfather Of Alt-Science
  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-grandfather-of-alt-science/

Anyone whose spent any time in Oregon knows this whack job.  And my apex 
predator of the signaling world homunculus yells at me to hate him as the 
crackpot he clearly is, as well as his neolithic social postions.  But *most* 
of my other homunculi have immense respect for someone who hacks their own path 
through the thicket, going to bat for every wannabe crackpot or inventor who 
spends their spare time breathing solder smoke in the basement or suffers 
regular chemical burns because they care more about their objective than 
safety.  Yes, DIY biology is dangerous.  But hey, we can't all work in the 
belly of some bureaucratic leviathan.


On 10/12/2017 02:44 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> "Apex predator of the signaling world."  
> 
> Cute, know it well.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:37 PM
> To: FriAM 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again
> 
> I know.  I just thought it was an interesting post.  That we'd recently 
> discussed Feynman was only a segue. I could also have used Russell as the 
> segue, since Marcus quoted him in our thread.
> 
> The 1st part of Aaronson's post re: Gowers is more interesting than the later 
> stuff.
> 
> On 10/12/2017 02:26 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>> I took issue not with Feynman as a person ...
> 
>> https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488
>>
>>> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
>>> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner 
>>> product with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand 
>>> above him, in the same way that set theory transcends and stands above 
>>> arithmetic by constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t 
>>> thereby become your achievements.
> 
> 
> --
> ☣ gⅼеɳ
> 
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> 

-- 
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[Marcus Daniels]

"Apex predator of the signaling world."  

Cute, know it well.

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:37 PM
To: FriAM 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

I know.  I just thought it was an interesting post.  That we'd recently 
discussed Feynman was only a segue. I could also have used Russell as the 
segue, since Marcus quoted him in our thread.

The 1st part of Aaronson's post re: Gowers is more interesting than the later 
stuff.

On 10/12/2017 02:26 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> I took issue not with Feynman as a person ...

> https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488
> 
>> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
>> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner 
>> product with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand 
>> above him, in the same way that set theory transcends and stands above 
>> arithmetic by constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t 
>> thereby become your achievements.


--
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[gⅼеɳ ☣]

I know.  I just thought it was an interesting post.  That we'd recently 
discussed Feynman was only a segue. I could also have used Russell as the 
segue, since Marcus quoted him in our thread.

The 1st part of Aaronson's post re: Gowers is more interesting than the later 
stuff.

On 10/12/2017 02:26 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> I took issue not with Feynman as a person ...

> https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488
> 
>> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
>> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner 
>> product with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand 
>> above him, in the same way that set theory transcends and stands above 
>> arithmetic by constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t 
>> thereby become your achievements.


-- 
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[Nick Thompson]

Glen, etc.

I took issue not with Feynman as a person, but with the off-quoted "aphorism", 
attributed to him,  that scientists have no more use for philosophy of science 
than birds have for ornithology.  The only reason birds don't have use for 
ornithology is that they can't read.  I assume that that disability does not 
apply to the scientists mentioned in the aphorism. 

Nick  

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ?
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:03 PM
To: FriAM 
Subject: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again

Since we recently went 'round about quoting and criticizing people who quote 
Feynman, I thought this would be interesting.

https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488

> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner product 
> with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand above him, in 
> the same way that set theory transcends and stands above arithmetic by 
> constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t thereby become 
> your achievements.


--
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[FRIAM] on Feynman, again

[gⅼеɳ ☣]

Since we recently went 'round about quoting and criticizing people who quote 
Feynman, I thought this would be interesting.

https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488

> if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing 
> chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner product 
> with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand above him, in 
> the same way that set theory transcends and stands above arithmetic by 
> constructing a model for it.  Feynman’s achievements don’t thereby become 
> your achievements.


-- 
☣ gⅼеɳ


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Chriopracter(sp) what takes insurances?

[Gillian Densmore]

Moving the hurting part might somehow help it heal. I have no idea how. or
why though. Chi Gong excersizes, yoga, resting the neck on a rolled pillow
and just getting up and moving, walking etc.Is helping the tech Nech part.
I have no idea why.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:47 AM, ┣glen┫  wrote:

> That's interesting.  Tennis doesn't strike me as particularly good for any
> part of the body, especially all that herky-jerky jumping back and forth.
> But there's no doubt that *any* activity is good.  And "alive" coordination
> with and against other actors in the world is a notch above what I do.
> There are 3 basic tiers: 1) canalized activity like weight machines or
> treadmills (or typing), 2) full 4D "space-filling" activity like free
> weights, calisthenics, or rock climbing, and then 3) engaging a living
> system like sparring or team sports.
>
> On 10/11/2017 07:27 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > My lower back pain has almost completely disappeared since I've been
> playing tennis three days a week.  Ironically, I think it's from bending
> over to pick up balls rather than from running and striking the ball.  On
> the other hand, some of the other elders that I play with have been injured
> by falls, etc.
>
> --
> ␦glen?
>
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Chriopracter(sp) what takes insurances?

[Gillian Densmore]

OH! that sounds like  one of Scot Mcneally(?)'s projects while he was at
SUN. I simply don't know if if was a SUN per SUN project or one of personel
interest.  Andy Ruhen (Android guy) I thought had something like that in
the works before his stint with Google I/O Sunk Works.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:37 AM, ┣glen┫  wrote:

> Yes!  I've forgotten who proposed it.  But what ever happened to the CPU
> fabric we were supposed to line our walls with so that our computing would
> wander around with us, flowing from wall to wall as we walked around?  I
> supposed I'd settle for some sort of AR or HUD that paints whatever's there
> with information, but equipped with accelerometers for 3D organization.
>
> On 10/11/2017 11:58 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Now I need some large monitors on the wall for reading documents.
>  Like a 20x1 aspect ratio so I can find things quickly, by walking.
>
>
> --
> ␦glen?
>
> 
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Chriopracter(sp) what takes insurances?

[┣glen┫]

That's interesting.  Tennis doesn't strike me as particularly good for any part 
of the body, especially all that herky-jerky jumping back and forth.  But 
there's no doubt that *any* activity is good.  And "alive" coordination with 
and against other actors in the world is a notch above what I do.  There are 3 
basic tiers: 1) canalized activity like weight machines or treadmills (or 
typing), 2) full 4D "space-filling" activity like free weights, calisthenics, 
or rock climbing, and then 3) engaging a living system like sparring or team 
sports.

On 10/11/2017 07:27 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> My lower back pain has almost completely disappeared since I've been playing 
> tennis three days a week.  Ironically, I think it's from bending over to pick 
> up balls rather than from running and striking the ball.  On the other hand, 
> some of the other elders that I play with have been injured by falls, etc.

-- 
␦glen?


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
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove