Re: [FRIAM] God

[Russell Standish]

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth 
detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: 
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
> 
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> 
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this 
> > crap.  The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is 
> > actually in the other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> > 
> 
> What paper? What argument?
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
>   http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> 
> 
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. -  . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> 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/ 

-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
  http://www.hpcoders.com.au


-  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
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/ 

Re: [FRIAM] God

[Jochen Fromm]

Nick your article reminds of Elizabeth Culotta. She says in her Science article 
that anthropomorphism is a natural property of humans that contributed to the 
rise of religions. She quotes Oxford University psychologist Justin Barrett who 
argues that "Humans have a tendency to see signs of agents—minds like our 
own—at work in the world" and Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom who says 
"We have a tremendous capacity to imbue even inanimate things with beliefs, 
desires, emotions, and consciousness,... and this is at the core of many 
religious beliefs".Elizabeth Culotta, On the Origin of Religion, Science (2009) 
Vol. 326, Issue 5954, 784-787-J.
 Original message From: Russell Standish 
 Date: 6/28/20  10:12  (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday 
Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'  Subject: Re: 
[FRIAM] God Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to 
the nth detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:1) What exactly is 
priveleged about introspection?2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism 
starts from anidentity between the target behaviour and the observers 
behaviour,which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching 
ata door to get in.In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege 
inintrospection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -that 
information is simply now available to external observers.In terms of the 
identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn'tneed to be identical, but 
it does need to be analogical. The mostimportant application of this skill is 
prediction of what other humanbeings do. People aren't the same, but they are 
similar - and humansociety functions because we can predict to some extent what 
otherpeople are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evovedin the 
first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, whichare social pack 
animals. We have also evolved the ability to "putourselves in somebody else's 
skin", taking into account the obviousexternal differences. So we can imagine 
being a dog, and wanting toget through a door, what would we do. We know we 
cannot stand up, andturn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what 
would we do,given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a 
likelybehaviour then. That, then is analogical.So, I'm not exactly convinced 
:).CheersOn Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com 
wrote:> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: > > 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti> 
ve_anthropomorphism> > Nicholas Thompson> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and 
Psychology> Clark University> thompnicks...@gmail.com> 
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>  > > > -Original Message-> 
From: Friam  On Behalf Of Russell Standish> Sent: 
Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group' > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God> > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 
09:59:37PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:> > Hi Russ,> > > >  > > > > 
Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this > > crap.  
The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is > > actually in the 
other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our> experience with 
others.> > > > What paper? What argument?> > > -- > > 
> 
Dr Russell Standish    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)> Principal, 
High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au>   
http://www.hpcoders.com.au> 
> > 
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. -  . -..-. . ...> 
... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...> 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/ -- 
Dr 
Russell Standish    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)Principal, High 
Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au  
http://www.hpcoders.com.au-
  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .FRIAM Applied Complexity 
Group listservZ

Re: [FRIAM] God

[thompnickson2]

Hi, russ,

 

Thanks for that careful reading.  There is no greater kindness than to take the 
time to read  colleague’s work.  

 

I will think carefully about what you say.  

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

thompnicks...@gmail.com  

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam  On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 3:08 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

 

Nick your article reminds of Elizabeth Culotta. She says in her Science article 
that anthropomorphism is a natural property of humans that contributed to the 
rise of religions. She quotes Oxford University psychologist Justin Barrett who 
argues that "Humans have a tendency to see signs of agents—minds like our 
own—at work in the world" and Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom who says 
"We have a tremendous capacity to imbue even inanimate things with beliefs, 
desires, emotions, and consciousness,... and this is at the core of many 
religious beliefs".

Elizabeth Culotta, On the Origin of Religion, Science (2009) Vol. 326, Issue 
5954, 784-787

 

-J.

 

 

 Original message 

From: Russell Standish mailto:li...@hpcoders.com.au> > 

Date: 6/28/20 10:12 (GMT+01:00) 

To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' mailto:friam@redfish.com> > 

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God 

 

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth 
detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: 
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
> 
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com  
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > 
> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'   >
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> 
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>   wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this 
> > crap.  The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is 
> > actually in the other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> > 
> 
> What paper? What argument?
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au 
>  
>   http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> 
> 
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. -  . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> 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-

Re: [FRIAM] God

[Frank Wimberly]

Russ,

Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.

Frank


---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish 
wrote:

> Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth
> detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective
> anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:
>
> 1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?
>
> 2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
> identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
> which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
> a door to get in.
>
> In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
> introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
> that information is simply now available to external observers.
>
> In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
> need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
> important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
> beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
> society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
> people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
> in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
> are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
> ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
> external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
> get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
> turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
> given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
> behaviour then. That, then is analogical.
>
> So, I'm not exactly convinced :).
>
> Cheers
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink:
> >
> >
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> > ve_anthropomorphism
> >
> > Nicholas Thompson
> > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> > Clark University
> > thompnicks...@gmail.com
> > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Friam  On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> > To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <
> friam@redfish.com>
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> >
> > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Hi Russ,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > > crap.  The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > > actually in the other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our
> > experience with others.
> > >
> >
> > What paper? What argument?
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> 
> > Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> > Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
> >   http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> >
> 
> >
> > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. -  . -..-. .
> ...
> > ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> > 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/
>
> --
>
>
> 
> Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
>   http://www.hpcoders.com.au
>
> 
>
> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
> 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/s

Re: [FRIAM] God

[Jochen Fromm]

I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't 
the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because we can 
predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also 
evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into 
account the obvious external differences."But we cannot predict what someone 
else will do, only if we know the person really well - for instance if it is 
your wife or husband for 30 years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the 
end why people have acted they way they did, but only in hindsight. In 
hindsight we almost always can say why people acted the way they did, but we 
cannot predict it beforehand. You say hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, 
right?We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's 
skin". It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires detailed 
knowledge and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has invented 
cinemas to show us how what it is like to be somebody else (the GoPro cameras 
in modern days have the same function).Therefore I tend to disagree with both 
statements. -J.
 Original message From: Frank Wimberly  
Date: 6/28/20  15:07  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity 
Coffee Group  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God Russ,Your views on 
these matters are very similar to my own.Frank---Frank C. Wimberly140 Calle Ojo 
Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505505 670-9918Santa Fe, NMOn Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM 
Russell Standish  wrote:Hi Nick - finally took a look at 
your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, 
your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands 
on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: 
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
> 
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> 
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this 
> > crap.  The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is 
> > actually in the other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> > 
> 
> What paper? What argument?
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders     hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
>                       http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> 
> 
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. -  . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> 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/ 
> 
> 
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - 

Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

[David Eric Smith]

I believe my brother has had it.

When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he intends to 
go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.

Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though it 
looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble breathing. 
 And he is 7 years younger than I am.

Eric


> On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM,  
>  wrote:
> 
> David,
>  
> nthomp...@clarku.edu  works just fine or 
> thompnicks...@gmail.com  . 
>  
> I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just told my 
> "pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring states, Santa 
> Fe has started to get more dangerous again, and that we should we should be 
> even more careful than we have been. (Rural Western Massachusetts got a lot 
> of cases from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)   With talk of a vaccine 
> by the beginning of next year, it just seems stupid to take any risks 
> whatsoever. 
>  
> It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact 
> electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how 
> "notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no 
> first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know 
> anybody, personally, who has told me that they know anybody who has had the 
> disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.  Pray God it 
> remains that way.   
>  
> So let's plan to meet "on the other side.". 
>  
> You take care!
>  
> Nick
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
> 
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
> To: friam@redfish.com
> Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson
>  
> Nick,
>  
> Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am in 
> Santa Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.
>  
> davew
>  
> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
> 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 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,b1ifu1dfNYDR7edhtbv5q7dQotyLcdyFOVkTFuiSO8I8NwO-hhFO89F2kq-ArLVOKJzASq5XA9Frk8oYbfg_JK8gdM5DHCnE3fDPl9He7etEByU,&typo=1
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,5rTA2JbqESRgNgVSLse_88usM0AVTfpYGS9vP8ByVqizwyrqdrVYBKGIbDPd6gzX2SD5-8IegE9gEE_ffIpKdqW_PFpngUjbXiHkD4GJYUXUktfdbA,,&typo=1
>  

-  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
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/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

[Jochen Fromm]

The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will act and 
we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know the 
history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the personal 
slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the world so far.If 
we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will. If we 
could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there would be no 
hard problem of consciousness. I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you 
to predict how the person will act to a certain degree. You could say two minds 
have merged into one. The two persons still have free will, but they are 
"similar wills" so to speak.In the same way intimate knowledge of the history 
of person allows you to experience the world as the person does, for example by 
seeing a movie about the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience 
the same events that the person has experienced.In this sense being married for 
25 or more years is like watching the same movie, the movie of your life :-)-J.
 Original message From: Jochen Fromm  Date: 
6/28/20  16:07  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God I am not sure I agree with 
the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't the same, but they are 
similar - and human society functions because we can predict to some extent 
what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also evolved the ability to 
'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into account the obvious 
external differences."But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if 
we know the person really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 
30 years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted 
they way they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say 
why people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say 
hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?We also haven't evolved the 
ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's skin". It is not impossible, but 
can be very difficult and requires detailed knowledge and imagination. This is 
the reason why Hollywood has invented cinemas to show us how what it is like to 
be somebody else (the GoPro cameras in modern days have the same 
function).Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements. -J. 
Original message From: Frank Wimberly  Date: 
6/28/20  15:07  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God Russ,Your views on these 
matters are very similar to my own.Frank---Frank C. Wimberly140 Calle Ojo 
Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505505 670-9918Santa Fe, NMOn Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM 
Russell Standish  wrote:Hi Nick - finally took a look at 
your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, 
your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands 
on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: 
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
> 
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Mornin

Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

[Frank Wimberly]

One third of all black Americans know a person who has had Covid-19.  So
says CBS Sunday Morning.

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 4:18 AM David Eric Smith  wrote:

> I believe my brother has had it.
>
> When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he
> intends to go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.
>
> Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though it
> looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble
> breathing.  And he is 7 years younger than I am.
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM,  <
> thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> nthomp...@clarku.edu works just fine or thompnicks...@gmail.com .
>
> I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just told
> my "pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring states,
> Santa Fe has started to get more dangerous again, and that we should we
> should be even more careful than we have been. (Rural Western Massachusetts
> got a lot of cases from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)   With talk of
> a vaccine by the beginning of next year, it just seems stupid to take any
> risks whatsoever.
>
> It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact
> electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how
> "notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no
> first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know
> anybody, personally, who has told me that they *know anybody* who has had
> the disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.  Pray
> God it remains that way.
>
> So let's plan to meet "on the other side.".
>
> You take care!
>
> Nick
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
> 
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
> To: friam@redfish.com
> Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson
>
> Nick,
>
> Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am in
> Santa Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.
>
> davew
>
> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
> 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
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,b1ifu1dfNYDR7edhtbv5q7dQotyLcdyFOVkTFuiSO8I8NwO-hhFO89F2kq-ArLVOKJzASq5XA9Frk8oYbfg_JK8gdM5DHCnE3fDPl9He7etEByU,&typo=1
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,5rTA2JbqESRgNgVSLse_88usM0AVTfpYGS9vP8ByVqizwyrqdrVYBKGIbDPd6gzX2SD5-8IegE9gEE_ffIpKdqW_PFpngUjbXiHkD4GJYUXUktfdbA,,&typo=1
>
>
> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
> 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/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

[doug carmichael]

On free will. Isn’t there a spectrum of predictability? She will get up in the 
morning and have coffee, but I am less sure about her reaction to the front 
page of today’s New York Times. That spectrum of predictability (people will 
stay on the socially sanctioned side of the road when driving) is enough for 
society to hold together. (and we may be losing it)


I like Bergson’s view. A simple one cell organism responds to things in its 
environment, like light or ph and its reaction  predictable. As the organism 
gets more complex, the range of things it can respond to in the environment 
such as  shapes and tastes - and the range of responses,  increases - until the 
point where predictability is impossible. This is free will. Seems reasonable 
to me.

> On Jun 28, 2020, at 7:39 AM, Jochen Fromm  wrote:
> 
> The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will act 
> and we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know 
> the history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the 
> personal slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the world 
> so far.
> 
> If we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will. If 
> we could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there would 
> be no hard problem of consciousness. 
> 
> I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you to predict how the person 
> will act to a certain degree. You could say two minds have merged into one. 
> The two persons still have free will, but they are "similar wills" so to 
> speak.
> 
> In the same way intimate knowledge of the history of person allows you to 
> experience the world as the person does, for example by seeing a movie about 
> the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience the same events that 
> the person has experienced.
> 
> In this sense being married for 25 or more years is like watching the same 
> movie, the movie of your life :-)
> 
> -J.
> 
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Jochen Fromm 
> Date: 6/28/20 16:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> 
> I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People 
> aren't the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because 
> we can predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We 
> have also evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', 
> taking into account the obvious external differences."
> 
> But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the person 
> really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30 years. In 
> whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted they way 
> they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say why 
> people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say 
> hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?
> 
> We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's 
> skin". It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires detailed 
> knowledge and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has invented 
> cinemas to show us how what it is like to be somebody else (the GoPro cameras 
> in modern days have the same function).
> 
> Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements. 
> 
> -J.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Frank Wimberly 
> Date: 6/28/20 15:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
> 
> Russ,
> 
> Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.
> 
> Frank
> 
> 
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
> 
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish  > wrote:
> Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth 
> detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
> anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:
> 
> 1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?
> 
> 2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
> identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
> which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
> a door to get in.
> 
> In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
> introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
> that information is simply now available to external observers.
> 
> In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
> need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
> important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
> beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
> society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
> people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evo

Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

[Frank Wimberly]

There's a difference between predicting another's behavior perfectly and
having some idea of what the other might do.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 8:40 AM Jochen Fromm  wrote:

> The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will act
> and we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know
> the history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the
> personal slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the
> world so far.
>
> If we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will.
> If we could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there
> would be no hard problem of consciousness.
>
> I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you to predict how the person
> will act to a certain degree. You could say two minds have merged into one.
> The two persons still have free will, but they are "similar wills" so to
> speak.
>
> In the same way intimate knowledge of the history of person allows you to
> experience the world as the person does, for example by seeing a movie
> about the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience the same
> events that the person has experienced.
>
> In this sense being married for 25 or more years is like watching the same
> movie, the movie of your life :-)
>
> -J.
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Jochen Fromm 
> Date: 6/28/20 16:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People
> aren't the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because
> we can predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We
> have also evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin',
> taking into account the obvious external differences."
>
> But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the
> person really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30
> years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted
> they way they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can
> say why people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand.
> You say hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?
>
> We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's
> skin". It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires
> detailed knowledge and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has
> invented cinemas to show us how what it is like to be somebody else (the
> GoPro cameras in modern days have the same function).
>
> Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements.
>
> -J.
>
>
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Frank Wimberly 
> Date: 6/28/20 15:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> Russ,
>
> Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.
>
> Frank
>
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth
>> detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective
>> anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:
>>
>> 1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?
>>
>> 2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
>> identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
>> which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
>> a door to get in.
>>
>> In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
>> introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
>> that information is simply now available to external observers.
>>
>> In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
>> need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
>> important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
>> beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
>> society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
>> people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
>> in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
>> are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
>> ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
>> external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
>> get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
>> turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
>> given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
>> behaviour then. That, then is analogical.
>>
>> So, I'm not exactly convinced :).
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On Sun, May 24, 

Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

[Jochen Fromm]

Yes, good point. I would say the personality determines the spectrum of 
predictability. A narcissistic person will lash out immediately if it is 
criticized. An altruistic person like the Dalai Lama will smile or say someone 
kind if it is criticized. The stronger the personality, the higher the 
predictability.As a person I also have the free will to become the person I 
aspire to be. If I want to be an artist, I can draw all day or visit an art 
school and one day I will be an artist. If I then walk around and see a 
beautiful landscape as an artist, I will probably want to paint it. My 
personality as a creative painter determines my decisions. Free will >> 
Personality >> Probable Action-J.
 Original message From: doug carmichael 
 Date: 6/28/20  17:34  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday 
Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group  Subject: Re: 
[FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will On free will. Isn’t there a spectrum of 
predictability? She will get up in the morning and have coffee, but I am less 
sure about her reaction to the front page of today’s New York Times. That 
spectrum of predictability (people will stay on the socially sanctioned side of 
the road when driving) is enough for society to hold together. (and we may be 
losing it)I like Bergson’s view. A simple one cell organism responds to things 
in its environment, like light or ph and its reaction  predictable. As the 
organism gets more complex, the range of things it can respond to in the 
environment such as  shapes and tastes - and the range of responses,  increases 
- until the point where predictability is impossible. This is free will. Seems 
reasonable to me.On Jun 28, 2020, at 7:39 AM, Jochen Fromm  
wrote:The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will 
act and we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know 
the history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the personal 
slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the world so far.If 
we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will. If we 
could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there would be no 
hard problem of consciousness. I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you 
to predict how the person will act to a certain degree. You could say two minds 
have merged into one. The two persons still have free will, but they are 
"similar wills" so to speak.In the same way intimate knowledge of the history 
of person allows you to experience the world as the person does, for example by 
seeing a movie about the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience 
the same events that the person has experienced.In this sense being married for 
25 or more years is like watching the same movie, the movie of your life 
:-)-J. Original message From: Jochen Fromm  
Date: 6/28/20  16:07  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity 
Coffee Group  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God I am not sure I agree 
with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't the same, but they are 
similar - and human society functions because we can predict to some extent 
what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also evolved the ability to 
'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into account the obvious 
external differences."But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if 
we know the person really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 
30 years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted 
they way they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say 
why people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say 
hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?We also haven't evolved the 
ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's skin". It is not impossible, but 
can be very difficult and requires detailed knowledge and imagination. This is 
the reason why Hollywood has invented cinemas to show us how what it is like to 
be somebody else (the GoPro cameras in modern days have the same 
function).Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements. -J. 
Original message From: Frank Wimberly  Date: 
6/28/20  15:07  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God Russ,Your views on these 
matters are very similar to my own.Frank---Frank C. Wimberly140 Calle Ojo 
Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505505 670-9918Santa Fe, NMOn Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM 
Russell Standish  wrote:Hi Nick - finally took a look at 
your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, 
your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands 
on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog

Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free swill

[thompnickson2]

Some times, more times than I like to admit, I have no idea what I am going to 
do next.  And on many of those occasions, my wife does.  It’s all inferences; 
fallible inferences of future action based on prior experience with the person 
(self or other) under similar circumstances.  

 

I think that’s all we got!

 

N

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

  thompnicks...@gmail.com

  
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam  On Behalf Of doug carmichael
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 9:33 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

 

On free will. Isn’t there a spectrum of predictability? She will get up in the 
morning and have coffee, but I am less sure about her reaction to the front 
page of today’s New York Times. That spectrum of predictability (people will 
stay on the socially sanctioned side of the road when driving) is enough for 
society to hold together. (and we may be losing it)

 

 

I like Bergson’s view. A simple one cell organism responds to things in its 
environment, like light or ph and its reaction  predictable. As the organism 
gets more complex, the range of things it can respond to in the environment 
such as  shapes and tastes - and the range of responses,  increases - until the 
point where predictability is impossible. This is free will. Seems reasonable 
to me.





On Jun 28, 2020, at 7:39 AM, Jochen Fromm mailto:j...@cas-group.net> > wrote:

 

The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will act and 
we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know the 
history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the personal 
slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the world so far.

If we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will. If 
we could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there would be 
no hard problem of consciousness. 

I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you to predict how the person will 
act to a certain degree. You could say two minds have merged into one. The two 
persons still have free will, but they are "similar wills" so to speak.

In the same way intimate knowledge of the history of person allows you to 
experience the world as the person does, for example by seeing a movie about 
the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience the same events that 
the person has experienced.

 

In this sense being married for 25 or more years is like watching the same 
movie, the movie of your life :-)

 

-J.

 

 

 Original message 

From: Jochen Fromm mailto:j...@cas-group.net> > 

Date: 6/28/20 16:07 (GMT+01:00) 

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group mailto:friam@redfish.com> > 

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God 

 

I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't 
the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because we can 
predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also 
evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into 
account the obvious external differences."

 

But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the person 
really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30 years. In 
whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted they way they 
did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say why people 
acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say hindsight 
is 20/20 for this in English, right?

 

We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's skin". 
It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires detailed knowledge 
and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has invented cinemas to show 
us how what it is like to be somebody else (the GoPro cameras in modern days 
have the same function).

 

Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements. 

 

-J.

 

 

 

 

 Original message 

From: Frank Wimberly mailto:wimber...@gmail.com> > 

Date: 6/28/20 15:07 (GMT+01:00) 

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group mailto:friam@redfish.com> > 

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God 

 

Russ,

 

Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.

 

Frank

 

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish mailto:li...@hpcoders.com.au> > wrote:

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth 
detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from a

Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

[Gary Schiltz]

Interesting. I didn't see the show, but might watch it on their web site.
Did they mention what proportion of white Americans know someone who has
had Covid-19?

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 9:47 AM Frank Wimberly  wrote:

> One third of all black Americans know a person who has had Covid-19.  So
> says CBS Sunday Morning.
>
> Frank
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 4:18 AM David Eric Smith 
> wrote:
>
>> I believe my brother has had it.
>>
>> When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he
>> intends to go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.
>>
>> Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though
>> it looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble
>> breathing.  And he is 7 years younger than I am.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM,  <
>> thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> David,
>>
>> nthomp...@clarku.edu works just fine or thompnicks...@gmail.com .
>>
>> I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just told
>> my "pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring states,
>> Santa Fe has started to get more dangerous again, and that we should we
>> should be even more careful than we have been. (Rural Western Massachusetts
>> got a lot of cases from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)   With talk of
>> a vaccine by the beginning of next year, it just seems stupid to take any
>> risks whatsoever.
>>
>> It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact
>> electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how
>> "notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no
>> first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know
>> anybody, personally, who has told me that they *know anybody* who has
>> had the disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.
>> Pray God it remains that way.
>>
>> So let's plan to meet "on the other side.".
>>
>> You take care!
>>
>> Nick
>> Nicholas Thompson
>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>> Clark University
>> thompnicks...@gmail.com
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>> 
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
>> Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
>> To: friam@redfish.com
>> Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson
>>
>> Nick,
>>
>> Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am in
>> Santa Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.
>>
>> davew
>>
>> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
>> 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
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,b1ifu1dfNYDR7edhtbv5q7dQotyLcdyFOVkTFuiSO8I8NwO-hhFO89F2kq-ArLVOKJzASq5XA9Frk8oYbfg_JK8gdM5DHCnE3fDPl9He7etEByU,&typo=1
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,5rTA2JbqESRgNgVSLse_88usM0AVTfpYGS9vP8ByVqizwyrqdrVYBKGIbDPd6gzX2SD5-8IegE9gEE_ffIpKdqW_PFpngUjbXiHkD4GJYUXUktfdbA,,&typo=1
>>
>>
>> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
>> 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 Com

Re: [FRIAM] a model of mine about virus diffusion

[Pietro Terna]

    Dear all,

    always at https://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html my model on Covid 
diffusion has made a lot of steps ahead, with realistic outcomes 
(reported in the slides linked there) and with a YouTube channel.


    Best, Pietro

Il 13/05/20 13:57, Pietro Terna ha scritto:

    Dear all,

    always at https://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html now it is also 
possible to run directly online, without installation, my agent-based 
program on virus diffusion,


    Best, Pietro

Il 09/05/20 12:54, Pietro Terna ha scritto:

    Dear all,

    a model of mine on virus diffusion (calibrated on Piedmont, my 
region in Italy, but quite easily modifiable) is at 
https://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html


    Explanations in the slides and in the Info sheet of the model.

    Best, Pietro


--
A simulation model about Covid-19 diffusion 
athttps://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html  (preliminary version, under 
development, comments welcome)

Home page:https://terna.to.it   Twitter:https://twitter.com/@pietroterna

Il lavoro e il valore al tempo dei robot - Intelligenza artificiale e 
non-occupazione, di Dunia Astrologo, Andrea Surbone e Pietro Terna, prefazione 
di Adam Smith.
Meltemi:http://www.meltemieditore.it/catalogo/lavoro-valore-allepoca-dei-robot/

A new book:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rethinking-macroeconomics-with-endogenous-market-structure/CF5640C357029D9E49BE67D63A3FB122#


--
Terna P., Pescarmona G., Acquadro A., Russo G., Pescarmona P., Terna S. (2020),
An Agent-Based Model of the Diffusione of Covid-19 Using NetLogo, 
URLhttps://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html

Home page:https://terna.to.it   Twitter:https://twitter.com/@pietroterna


--
Terna P., Pescarmona G., Acquadro A., Pescarmona P., Russo G., Terna S. (2020),
An Agent-Based Model of the Diffusion of Covid-19 Using NetLogo, 
URLhttps://terna.to.it/simul/SIsaR.html

The model presentation in 
YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC31OBWUtgee7BQ7qQ3bqNeA/featured?view_as=subscriber

Home page:https://terna.to.it   Twitter:https://twitter.com/@pietroterna
Honorary Fellow del Collegio Carlo Alberto.

-  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
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/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

[Frank Wimberly]

They did not but I'm sure it's far smaller than 1/3.

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 2:08 PM Gary Schiltz 
wrote:

> Interesting. I didn't see the show, but might watch it on their web site.
> Did they mention what proportion of white Americans know someone who has
> had Covid-19?
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 9:47 AM Frank Wimberly 
> wrote:
>
>> One third of all black Americans know a person who has had Covid-19.  So
>> says CBS Sunday Morning.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> ---
>> Frank C. Wimberly
>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>
>> 505 670-9918
>> Santa Fe, NM
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 4:18 AM David Eric Smith 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe my brother has had it.
>>>
>>> When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he
>>> intends to go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.
>>>
>>> Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though
>>> it looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble
>>> breathing.  And he is 7 years younger than I am.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM,  <
>>> thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> David,
>>>
>>> nthomp...@clarku.edu works just fine or thompnicks...@gmail.com .
>>>
>>> I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just
>>> told my "pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring
>>> states, Santa Fe has started to get more dangerous again, and that we
>>> should we should be even more careful than we have been. (Rural Western
>>> Massachusetts got a lot of cases from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)
>>>  With talk of a vaccine by the beginning of next year, it just seems stupid
>>> to take any risks whatsoever.
>>>
>>> It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact
>>> electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how
>>> "notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no
>>> first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know
>>> anybody, personally, who has told me that they *know anybody* who has
>>> had the disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.
>>> Pray God it remains that way.
>>>
>>> So let's plan to meet "on the other side.".
>>>
>>> You take care!
>>>
>>> Nick
>>> Nicholas Thompson
>>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>>> Clark University
>>> thompnicks...@gmail.com
>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
>>> Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
>>> To: friam@redfish.com
>>> Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson
>>>
>>> Nick,
>>>
>>> Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am
>>> in Santa Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.
>>>
>>> davew
>>>
>>> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
>>> 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
>>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,b1ifu1dfNYDR7edhtbv5q7dQotyLcdyFOVkTFuiSO8I8NwO-hhFO89F2kq-ArLVOKJzASq5XA9Frk8oYbfg_JK8gdM5DHCnE3fDPl9He7etEByU,&typo=1
>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC
>>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,5rTA2JbqESRgNgVSLse_88usM0AVTfpYGS9vP8ByVqizwyrqdrVYBKGIbDPd6gzX2SD5-8IegE9gEE_ffIpKdqW_PFpngUjbXiHkD4GJYUXUktfdbA,,&typo=1
>>>
>>>
>>> -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
>>> 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/subscrib

Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

[Frank Wimberly]

By the way, I just had a Zoom reunion with my fellow graduate students from
Carnegie Mellon from the years 1967-1973 more or less.  I had forgotten
that one of them had Covid-19.  Stu Card wrote a book with Allen Newell on
human-computer interaction in which they develop a model of the human
user.  Stu has recovered despite having an "underlying condition".

Frank

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 3:12 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:

> They did not but I'm sure it's far smaller than 1/3.
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 2:08 PM Gary Schiltz 
> wrote:
>
>> Interesting. I didn't see the show, but might watch it on their web site.
>> Did they mention what proportion of white Americans know someone who has
>> had Covid-19?
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 9:47 AM Frank Wimberly 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One third of all black Americans know a person who has had Covid-19.  So
>>> says CBS Sunday Morning.
>>>
>>> Frank
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Frank C. Wimberly
>>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>>
>>> 505 670-9918
>>> Santa Fe, NM
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 4:18 AM David Eric Smith 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I believe my brother has had it.

 When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he
 intends to go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.

 Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though
 it looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble
 breathing.  And he is 7 years younger than I am.

 Eric


 On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM,  <
 thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote:

 David,

 nthomp...@clarku.edu works just fine or thompnicks...@gmail.com .

 I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just
 told my "pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring
 states, Santa Fe has started to get more dangerous again, and that we
 should we should be even more careful than we have been. (Rural Western
 Massachusetts got a lot of cases from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)
  With talk of a vaccine by the beginning of next year, it just seems stupid
 to take any risks whatsoever.

 It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact
 electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how
 "notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no
 first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know
 anybody, personally, who has told me that they *know anybody* who has
 had the disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.
 Pray God it remains that way.

 So let's plan to meet "on the other side.".

 You take care!

 Nick
 Nicholas Thompson
 Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
 Clark University
 thompnicks...@gmail.com
 https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
 


 -Original Message-
 From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
 Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
 To: friam@redfish.com
 Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

 Nick,

 Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am
 in Santa Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.

 davew

 -  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .
 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
 https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,b1ifu1dfNYDR7edhtbv5q7dQotyLcdyFOVkTFuiSO8I8NwO-hhFO89F2kq-ArLVOKJzASq5XA9Frk8oYbfg_JK8gdM5DHCnE3fDPl9He7etEByU,&typo=1
 archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
 FRIAM-COMIC
 https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,5rTA2JbqESRgNgVSLse_88usM0AVTfpYGS9vP8ByVqizwyrqdrVYBKGIbDPd6gzX2SD5-8IegE9gEE_ffIpKdqW_PFpngUjbXiHkD4GJYUXU

[FRIAM] Does anybody know directly a covid case?

[thompnickson2]

I changed the name of this thread.  Having my name appear as a subject was 
beginning to make me feel like I died, or something. 

 

N

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

  thompnicks...@gmail.com

  
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam  On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 3:48 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

 

By the way, I just had a Zoom reunion with my fellow graduate students from 
Carnegie Mellon from the years 1967-1973 more or less.  I had forgotten that 
one of them had Covid-19.  Stu Card wrote a book with Allen Newell on 
human-computer interaction in which they develop a model of the human user.  
Stu has recovered despite having an "underlying condition".

 

Frank

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 3:12 PM Frank Wimberly mailto:wimber...@gmail.com> > wrote:

They did not but I'm sure it's far smaller than 1/3.

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 2:08 PM Gary Schiltz mailto:g...@naturesvisualarts.com> > wrote:

Interesting. I didn't see the show, but might watch it on their web site. Did 
they mention what proportion of white Americans know someone who has had 
Covid-19?

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 9:47 AM Frank Wimberly mailto:wimber...@gmail.com> > wrote:

One third of all black Americans know a person who has had Covid-19.  So says 
CBS Sunday Morning.

 

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 4:18 AM David Eric Smith mailto:desm...@santafe.edu> > wrote:

I believe my brother has had it.

 

When he is well enough to move around and not infect anybody else he intends to 
go get tested for antibodies.  Maybe another week.

 

Said it was one of the three worst illnesses of his life so far, though it 
looks like mostly extreme fatigue and lassitude; not evident trouble breathing. 
 And he is 7 years younger than I am.

 

Eric

 





On Jun 28, 2020, at 1:23 AM, mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> > mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

David, 

 

nthomp...@clarku.edu   works just fine or 
thompnicks...@gmail.com   .  

 

I am really, REALLY  sorry but I don't think we should meet.  I just told my 
"pod" that I think that, with the rising cases in neighboring states, Santa Fe 
has started to get more dangerous again, and that we should we should be even 
more careful than we have been. (Rural Western Massachusetts got a lot of cases 
from "vacationing" New Yorkers in March.)   With talk of a vaccine by the 
beginning of next year, it just seems stupid to take any risks whatsoever.  

 

It's not that long.  In the meantime, let's continue to interact 
electronically.  We could do our own zoom session.  You will point out how 
"notional" the hazard is, and I will have to admit that I actually have no 
first-hand experience with the disease, what-so-ever.  I don't even know 
anybody, personally, who has told me that they know anybody who has had the 
disease.  It is still, for me, a media event.  A cultural meme.  Pray God it 
remains that way.   

 

So let's plan to meet "on the other side.".  

 

You take care!

 

Nick 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

thompnicks...@gmail.com  

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Friam mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > On 
Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:10 AM
To: friam@redfish.com  
Subject: [FRIAM] Nick Thompson

 

Nick,

 

Your Earthlink email address (the only other one I have) bounced. I am in Santa 
Fe for a couple of days, until July 2.

 

davew

 

-  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-.  . .-. .

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/ 

-  . -..-. . -. -.. -..-

Re: [FRIAM] Does anybody know directly a covid case?

[Steve Smith]

My nephew in Tucson very likely had it... pretty harsh symptoms for
about a  month (April into May) and still recovering his
stamina/breath...  he called his doc who advised him to "stay home and
ride it out" but said he couldn't offer a test unless he was admitted
into the hospital.  He may now be able to get an antigen test if he
insists.   His sister is a freshly minted RN who cares for dozens of
COVID19 patients in a "nearly" full hospital in Riverside CA...   many
of the emergency personnel in the county she works with have contracted
it (because their PPE isn't as good as the hospital workers, and they
have less control over their contact with infected persons).  I know
about a half-dozen people who *want to believe* they had it for one
reason or another.   I'm doubting most if not all of them.

My $.02 analysis:  The algebra of network transmission is geometric but
the awareness of other's condition is closer to linear.   Just because
every actor is 7 degrees from Kevin Bacon doesn't mean many of them know
the path(s) between them.   This means if/when you do contract it, you
probably won't see it coming, especially with the higher rates of
asymptomatic infections being recognized?

From rt.live, two/thirds of the states have an Ro over 1.0, with the
error bars, one might argue that many are around 1.33, which happens to
also be the latest estimate for OK.   Ro is the mean number of people
that a COVID19 infected person will infect directly, given all of the
factors, including social distancing, use of PPE and disinfection, etc.
in place for the person.   If the exponent is 1.33 then R1 is 1.78, and
r6 (Kevin Bacon) is over 7. 



So when one "average" person in Tulsa contracts COVID19, in 7 "gestation
periods" (average 2-4 days?)  7 people will have contracted it for an R6
of 7.   However, if that "average" person goes to a Trump Rally on day1
and chooses not to wear a mask (even if they do normally) then their Ro
goes up significantly.   If they *also* shout "lock her up!" or "build
the wall!" or "4 more years!"  "MAGaaa!" alternatively into the
faces of the people beside them (gotta pack every seat, can't look like
a wuss!) and over the shoulders of 3 or 4 in the row below them, then Ro
jumps by 4 or 6 and then if they keep shouting and embracing and
chest-bumping on the way out to the parking lot, you might add another 5
or 10 or 20.   But "no problem", that is just one night of glory... 
maybe the 10 or 100 or 1000 people infected and attending *only*
"super-spread"  to 10x or 20x (there were only 6.xK so that caps it!)
...   but wait!  Do you (and all those you infect) go home and go back
to Ro==1.33 behaviour, or are you all jacked up on Trump Fever and
decide you will liberate yourself from that damned mask, and all that
wussy "social distancing"?   So now your Ro is >1.33... conservatively
those infected while wearing their red hat too tight might slip by with
an Ro of 2.0   and since you are too proud to spend time with
LIbtards and Wussy Dems  ro^=2 becomes an R6 of 64.   Sounds like the
perfect formula for a super-spreading event.   I'm guessing my estimates
here are overdone or we will *patently* see  a Trump-Spike from Tulsa
(do we even know how many attendees were from OK?).

I understand that Trump2020 app records when it encounters a bluetooth
beacon

(ostensibly only in Trump2020 yard signs?), maybe a white-hat hacker can
hijack it to do peer-to-peer contact tracing to *demonstrate* this
KevinBaconCovid19 effect?  Or maybe the TikTokkers have already hacked
Trump2020App and are running around making Brad Parscale entirely
misunderstand his demographic...   nothing like a little
false-confidence to FFfff up a campaign (eh DNC 2016)?

Of course, I could probably tell a similar story about BLM protestors
(maybe even in Tulsa?)  but oddly most of them seem to be happy to wear
masks and maintain some distance, even if they are shouting "I can't
Breathe!" and "Say their names!" or "No Trump!  No KKK! No fascist
USA!"  at the top of their lungs,  They might just be *doubling* their
Ro to 2.7 and when they go home, they may well return to Ro=1.33 or
better?   

Did anyone else watch the Series "Watchmen" last year (I'm re-watching
it right now)...  Way too much premonition!  Feeds the conspiracy that
COVID19 and BLM protests are all a "Hollywood Elite" hoax.  "Robert
Redford, President for Life!"

- Steve


  Search Results


Web resul

On 6/28/20 4:08 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I changed the name of this thread.  Having my name appear as a subject
> was beginning to make me feel like I died, or something.
>
>  
>
> N
>
>  
>
> Nicholas Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>
> Clark University
>
> thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>  
>

Re: [FRIAM] Does anybody know directly a covid case?

[George Duncan]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 7:18 PM Steve Smith  wrote:

> My nephew in Tucson very likely had it... pretty harsh symptoms for about
> a  month (April into May) and still recovering his stamina/breath...  he
> called his doc who advised him to "stay home and ride it out" but said he
> couldn't offer a test unless he was admitted into the hospital.  He may now
> be able to get an antigen test if he insists.   His sister is a freshly
> minted RN who cares for dozens of COVID19 patients in a "nearly" full
> hospital in Riverside CA...   many of the emergency personnel in the county
> she works with have contracted it (because their PPE isn't as good as the
> hospital workers, and they have less control over their contact with
> infected persons).  I know about a half-dozen people who *want to believe*
> they had it for one reason or another.   I'm doubting most if not all of
> them.
>
> My $.02 analysis:  The algebra of network transmission is geometric but
> the awareness of other's condition is closer to linear.   Just because
> every actor is 7 degrees from Kevin Bacon doesn't mean many of them know
> the path(s) between them.   This means if/when you do contract it, you
> probably won't see it coming, especially with the higher rates of
> asymptomatic infections being recognized?
>
> From rt.live, two/thirds of the states have an Ro over 1.0, with the error
> bars, one might argue that many are around 1.33, which happens to also be
> the latest estimate for OK.   Ro is the mean number of people that a
> COVID19 infected person will infect directly, given all of the factors,
> including social distancing, use of PPE and disinfection, etc. in place for
> the person.   If the exponent is 1.33 then R1 is 1.78, and r6 (Kevin Bacon)
> is over 7.
>
> 
>
> So when one "average" person in Tulsa contracts COVID19, in 7 "gestation
> periods" (average 2-4 days?)  7 people will have contracted it for an R6 of
> 7.   However, if that "average" person goes to a Trump Rally on day1 and
> chooses not to wear a mask (even if they do normally) then their Ro goes up
> significantly.   If they *also* shout "lock her up!" or "build the wall!"
> or "4 more years!"  "MAGaaa!" alternatively into the faces of the
> people beside them (gotta pack every seat, can't look like a wuss!) and
> over the shoulders of 3 or 4 in the row below them, then Ro jumps by 4 or 6
> and then if they keep shouting and embracing and chest-bumping on the way
> out to the parking lot, you might add another 5 or 10 or 20.   But "no
> problem", that is just one night of glory...  maybe the 10 or 100 or 1000
> people infected and attending *only* "super-spread"  to 10x or 20x (there
> were only 6.xK so that caps it!) ...   but wait!  Do you (and all those you
> infect) go home and go back to Ro==1.33 behaviour, or are you all jacked up
> on Trump Fever and decide you will liberate yourself from that damned mask,
> and all that wussy "social distancing"?   So now your Ro is >1.33...
> conservatively those infected while wearing their red hat too tight might
> slip by with an Ro of 2.0   and since you are too proud to spend time
> with LIbtards and Wussy Dems  ro^=2 becomes an R6 of 64.   Sounds like the
> perfect formula for a super-spreading event.   I'm guessing my estimates
> here are overdone or we will *patently* see  a Trump-Spike from Tulsa (do
> we even know how many attendees were from OK?).
>
> I understand that Trump2020 app records when it encounters a bluetooth
> beacon
> 
> (ostensibly only in Trump2020 yard signs?), maybe a white-hat hacker can
> hijack it to do peer-to-peer contact tracing to *demonstrate* this
> KevinBaconCovid19 effect?  Or maybe the TikTokkers have already hacked
> Trump2020App and are running around making Brad Parscale entirely
> misunderstand his demographic...   nothing like a little false-confidence
> to FFfff up a campaign (eh DNC 2016)?
>
> Of course, I could probably tell a similar story about BLM protestors
> (maybe even in Tulsa?)  but oddly most of them seem to be happy to wear
> masks and maintain some distance, even if they are shouting "I can't
> Breathe!" and "Say their names!" or "No Trump!  No KKK! No fascist USA!"
> at the top of their lungs,  They might just be *doubling* their Ro to 2.7
> and when they go home, they may well return to Ro=1.33 or better?
>
> Did anyone else watch the Series "Watchmen" last year (I'm re-watching it
> right now)...  Way too much premonition!  Feeds the conspiracy that COVID19
> and BLM protests are all a "Hollywood Elite" hoax.  "Robert Redford,
> President for Life!"
>
> - Steve
> Search Results
> Web resul
> On 6/28/20 4:08 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I changed the name of this thread.  Having my name appear as a subject was
> beginning to make me feel like I died, or something.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
>
> E

Re: [FRIAM] Does anybody know directly a covid case?

[Jon Zingale]

Steve,

I was really impressed by the work put into the 'Watchman'
television series, much better than the movie that was
supposedly based on the graphic novel. I loved that they
bothered to pick up where the book left off, and where the
movie conspicuously failed to end. Though I miss the whole
'tales from the black freighter' storyline at all. Alan Moore
can be pretty hit or miss, but with 'Watchman' he managed
to make bulls-eye.

Jon



--
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/