OK. But the conception you're using requires a notion of
function/purpose/telos, where the original context was 'what it's for' and the
new context is a reuse. And as long as you allow that sort of dualism, then
fine. But if you admit that the equivalence classes assumed by reusability are
frag
Right. But that was my original point.You can't distinguish the early parts of
a remedial sickness from a dying process. And, with cats at least, many things,
like struvite crystals in males, if you don't intervene they withdraw and die
... i.e. dying versus merely getting sick are not isolable
Glen -
> "Automism" is a funky word. But if it means something like knee-jerk
> reaction, then I get it. The important question you ask evaluates negative,
> though. No, nothing "is what it is however it comes to be." This is an
> instance of the logical abstraction layer I've been mentionin
Glen writes:
< My guess is the only people who have ordinary, practical understandings of
the dying process are (critical care) nurses, hospice workers, etc. who see it
often. And even though they aren't dying, our (intra-species) "mind reading"
might give them enough to work on. >
The subj
Heh, I'm imagining the logic where injuries result in more (good) social
interaction ... like the way we felt about soccer as a kid. But I take issue
with your words "ordinary, practical". I hurt myself a lot in various
different ways. And I think anyone who does so, has a practical understan
Glen writes:
< So, had Amy been to the vet more than a handful of times, then there's reason
to believe she would recognize a sickness-treatment-health process. But
there's no way she could recognize the dying process. >
I suppose I am defining the dying process in an ordinary, practical way:
Yep. Not as mind-blowing, but absolutely OUTRAGEOUS was the fact that none of
them knew how much *work* went into the creation of that mysterious fluid.
Whenever I saw it, I thought of the untold number of bench scientists who
worked on it and its predecessors, as well as all the animals we sa
Glen writes:
< I can say much the same thing about my fellow cancer patients. Sitting in
the infusion chair for 8 hours once a month for 2.5 years gives you a lot of
time to get to know your fellow patients. They mostly had *zero* idea *what*
was happening, despite the doctor's best efforts.
Well, hearkening back to our discussion about cross-species "mind reading", I
do know Amy knew *something* was happening. Around the turn of the new year,
she started puking up all her solid food (because it couldn't get past the
adenoma). For the 1st 2 days, having had cats for my entire life
Glen writes:
< So, one of our cats died on Wednesday. She went in for exploratory surgery
to investigate a mass that was preventing food from moving from her stomach to
her intestines. It was a pyloric adenoma the surgeon saw no good way to fix.
So we killed her. The important question is
"Automism" is a funky word. But if it means something like knee-jerk reaction,
then I get it. The important question you ask evaluates negative, though. No,
nothing "is what it is however it comes to be." This is an instance of the
logical abstraction layer I've been mentioning (that has no
t; behavior in social situations? Or perhaps not? 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.
Steve writes:
< My own experience with mob-behaviour is that there is something about
*my* behaviour/instincts/breeding that has me avoiding mob behaviour. >
When it was a matter of survival to have a pack for food and defense, it is not
hard to see how a preference for membership in pac
siological machine operating in a physical environment.
>
> Nick
>
> Nick
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
> Clark University
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam
Marcus -
Ok... I think I did tangent on your point about your dog (as I sit with
two very different dogs at my feet, neither of which have herding
instincts but each with very acute instincts of their own (1 purebred
Akita and doberman mix).
My own experience with mob-behaviour is that there is s
20 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
I appreciate the point:
It's not the result of a dynamical system that occurs has occurred on the
timescale of her life.
There may be psychochemical dynamical systems inside her body involved in
maintaining "sight of
Steve writes:
< There may be psychochemical dynamical systems inside her body involved
in maintaining "sight of you" and there likely *were* complex feedback
loops in the intentional breeding of her ancestors as well as the
natural selection environments that lead her first ancestor (w
> There's something nagging at me.
Not surprising, this was pretty "off the cuff" but I'll try to either
defend/modify/retract as appropriate.
> But I can't quite figure out what it is. On the one hand, you say "The
> larger culture is where these attractors ... exist." Yet you seem to allo
Well, someone could suggest that the bred-in knob is the stable feature in a
larger evolutionary/ecological system in which the breed and individual
organism are finer grained components entrained by the larger dynamic. So by
slicing out the organism's timescale from the evolutionary timescale,
I appreciate the point:
It's not the result of a dynamical system that occurs has occurred on the
timescale of her life.
There may be psychochemical dynamical systems inside her body involved
in maintaining "sight of you" and there likely *were* complex feedback
loops in the intentional breedin
I don't know if this helps but these group-experiences seem to me to
have the feature of phase-lock, canalization, and entrainment.
I recently *re*watched a surreal dystopian scandinavian film "The
Bothersome Man" where the protaganist finds himself (after a
suicide/attempt) delivered to a city/j
I think of the "experience being with other people" as sort of like how my
herding dog follows me from room to room. There's a knob in her head that is
set to keep a visual distance with her people. It's what she expects and it
comes from her breed. It's not the result of a dynamical syste
That's fine. But it doesn't directly address the point. Is
experience-being-with-other-people really an "attractor" in the sense we
usually use that term? I don't think so. I think the normal (complexity
fanboi) sense of "attractor" is at least somewhat reductionist/thin/flat and
not commen
Glen writes:
< So, to [mis]extrapolate all the way to social systems, a rally participant
may not have much choice but to feel the adrenaline rush of chanting "Lock Him
Up!". But where is the attractor in such a conception? >
Some people participate in intramural sports or sing in a choir.
There's something nagging at me. But I can't quite figure out what it is. On
the one hand, you say "The larger culture is where these attractors ... exist."
Yet you seem to allow for (these or other) attractors to exist at a finer
layer, within you or in a very proximate locale near you with
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
*From:*Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Steven
A Smith
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 15, 2019 1:13 PM
*To:* friam@redfish.com
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Few of you
Barry -
Fascinating anecdote!... pretty studly, canoeing (open canoe?) in that
country anytime of year. I don't think "normal" kids do that kind of
stuff anymore!
- Steve
On 1/15/19 2:07 PM, Barry MacKichan wrote:
Funny, I was going to mention this (the hybrid car, not the interview)
as w
That's an interesting idea. I don't think that's what I'm describing, though.
I'm simply describing my coping strategy for coerced social interaction, mostly
with strangers. If I meet the same person more than 2 or 3 times, a real
relationship develops and I don't play the roles anymore.
On
:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 1:13 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
I appreciate the introduction of "roles" and "topics" and "attractors" here.
I would say that *I* exper
Funny, I was going to mention this (the hybrid car, not the interview)
as well.
Jonathan Wouk is Victor’s son, and was in my class at Harvard (1965).
We were both active in the Harvard Outing Club (hiking, spelunking in
NY, Virginia and W. Virginia, climbing in the Presidential Range in NH
on
h.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:27 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
Glen writes:
< It's truly a breath of fresh air when I run across someone else
plexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
Glen writes:
< It's truly a breath of fresh air when I run across someone else who is
willing to swap roles several times through a single conversation. >
Why do there have to be rol
Hm. Maybe you're right. Maybe I've been *told* I'm anti-social and simply
been a victim of those over-socialized people who don't show much depth in
social contexts. Regardless, the topical question I raised still stands: For
those poor sailors who *feel* demeaned by the algorithmic context,
nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:19 AM
To: FriAM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
So, while reading the wikipedia article, an old saw of mine re-emerges. They
t:* Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10:29 AM *To:*
> friam@redfish.com *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...>
>
> *"any military must operate on algorithms" *(Nick)
>
> Not really true. and there is a huge spectrum of "algorithm-ness" as a
> func
If you were really antisocial, you wouldn't care how you seem. It seems to me
this is more a tactic for executing conversations rather than a necessity.
One could merely inhibit the self in various ways topic by topic. As for
alcohol, it actually becomes easier for me to do this, as my inn
nk.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10:29 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
"any military must operate on algorithms" (Nick)
Not really true. and
/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10:29 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
Glen claims "antisocial" and I think Dave has mentioned his own "tendency to
Good question. An individual discussing a topic implies a deep, historical,
perspective on the part of the discussant. When I engage individuals (with
deep structure and historicity), I have a lot of work to do to carry on a
healthy conversation. Such work is exhausting. Even a *social* pers
Glen writes:
< It's truly a breath of fresh air when I run across someone else who is
willing to swap roles several times through a single conversation. >
Why do there have to be roles and not just topics?
Marcus
FRIAM Applied Co
n’t need to.
> I’d like to think that if enough people smacked them in the head they would
> stop it.
>
> From: Friam on behalf of Nick Thompson
>
> Date: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 at 10:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
>
> Interesting article. Refe
Steve, I too would prefer the term asocial rather than anti.
However, I have, on occasion, been a 'domestic terrorist' which is
pretty anti-social.
I can really enjoy being part of a team — for a couple of decades I
played basketball 3+ hours a day, 7 days a week. I was, what they called
it at the
, 2019 at 10:15 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
Marcus,
Interesting article. Referenced within it is a long Wikipedia article on
self-categorization
theory<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-categorization_theory&g
Glen,
I would definitely agree that we are being pretty loose with our notion of
algorithmic. But, keeping to the spirit of the discussion so far in that regard:
I would agree that teams, while practicing, are "by definition, algorithmic.
But, I would contend that while playing, they are not —
Nick -
Attempting to respond to the "algorithmic" subtopic:
I have felt from an early age (before I knew the term algorithm) that
the socio-political-religious-economic systems we all operate within are
algorithmic. I am prone to define "fascism" as any such systems which
go over some magic
As usual, embedded in your story lies our group identity which we might call
"applied complexity". Well done!
On 1/15/19 9:29 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> Glen claims "antisocial" and I think Dave has mentioned his own "tendency to
> withdraw from society" (my paraphrase, I welcome correction or
.@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly *Sent:* Monday, January 14, 2019 10:01 PM *To:* The Friday
> Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:*
> Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...>
> I read the book but I don't remember that paragraph. As you know, dad
> was a Na
Glen claims "antisocial" and I think Dave has mentioned his own
"tendency to withdraw from society" (my paraphrase, I welcome correction
or elaboration. I hypothosize that *many* who are significantly
engaged in online discussion/community may well fit one of the myriad
positions on (and nea
Heh, all of this begs for a definition of "algorithmic". I sincerely doubt
Nick was using it in the sense of a fully definite process that is guaranteed
to halt. So, there's something else, there, something significantly *softer*
... more vague ... ill-defined. It's almost as if Nick (or Wouk
pplied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
Glen writes:
"But I seem to meet a lot of people who truly *enjoy* being in and playing on
teams."
<https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/12/people-adopt-made-up-social-rules-to-be-part-of-a-group/>
h
Nick wrote:
"Computers are the conscripted sailors of our generation."
I would say that "computer users are the conscripted sailors.
Computers, computing, software: all are algorithmic, creating an
"algorithmic context" (Navy) within which human users (Sailors) are
constrained to act.
Like hu
Glen writes:
"But I seem to meet a lot of people who truly *enjoy* being in and playing on
teams."
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/12/people-adopt-made-up-social-rules-to-be-part-of-a-group/
Marcus
FRIAM Applied Complexity Gr
I don't know, man. I'm an antisocial person. But I seem to meet a lot of
people who truly *enjoy* being in and playing on teams. Teams are, by
definition, algorithmic, some more, some less. The same could be said about
going to arena sized concerts, or chanting silly things at protests or ra
om
> <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 10:01 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
>
> I read the book but I don
m-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 10:01 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Few of you ...
I read the book but I don't remember that paragraph. As you know, dad was a
Naval Officer who achieved
I read the book but I don't remember that paragraph. As you know, dad was
a Naval Officer who achieved respectable rank. I was fascinated by it but
he felt that all the pomp and ceremony was BS. If computers are today's
sailors, something is lost and something gained.
Frank
---
, I imagine, are old enough to remember this:
"The Navy is a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots. If
you are not an idiot, but find yourself in the Navy, you can only operate
well by pretending to be one. All the shortcuts and economies and
common-sense changes that your n
57 matches
Mail list logo
