[FRIAM] Wimsatt and robustness

Of late, I've become interested (AKA "mildly obsessed") in/with William Wimsatt's work. (hmmm, U of Chicago, aren't some folks recently in the news from there?) Always liked the notion of processes selecting for accessibility (to maybe see what I'm talking about, study the Hasegawa dyptich

Re: [FRIAM] Wimsatt and robustness

Here's what Wimsatt says about how to decide what's real (from the Ontology of Complex Systemspaper, page 2). Before I say what there is in this complex world, I should give my criteria for regarding something as real or trustworthy. ... I

Re: [FRIAM] Wimsatt and robustness

Fair point if he was talking about science and how its done. But it seems to me this was about ontology. (Yeah, he's got some chops in science and engineering, and yeah, the referral was from Corfield who worries a lot about how math communities work, but this is maybe not about science per s

Re: [FRIAM] Wimsatt and robustness

Thus spake Russ Abbott circa 11/30/2008 09:31 PM: > It seems to me that most branches of modern science (particle physics, > astronomy, neuro-anatomy, ...) rely on tools to see what's real, and those > tools do not provide a variety of independent ways to access them. It feels > initially intuitiv