Friam

11 American Nations

Classic

List

Threaded

222 messages Options

1 ... 3456789 ... 12

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: right vs left

On 1/9/14 6:59 PM, glen wrote:
> If it turns out to be necessarily the case that rich people rule the
> world, then more refined questions would revolve around how to govern
> the behavior of the rich people.
I'm told that in some countries like Sri Lanka, money comes with power,
rather than power with money.
Make an appropriate tax table, or send out the military intelligence to
deal with these people that fancy themselves as the deciders.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

On 01/09/2014 07:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Ok. Great. Where would you like to start?

Well, we've already started. See Marcus' post, my response, and Steve's
response. I tried to send a private message to you to see if you wanted
to take a one-on-one conversation off line. But my e-mails were
rejected by Earthlink ... it reminded me of those yards around are
neighborhood plastered with "Keep Out", "No Trespassing", "Beware of
Dog" signs all over the trees, on the fence, etc. ;-) ... bringing "get
off my lawn" to the internet!

--
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
At the way she's jerking and grinding your gears

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

Oh, Dear. It's not supposed to do THAT! It's just supposed to ask where you live, where your mother lives, for your first born son as a hostage, and three players to be named later. Did it actually refuse you? Could you send me a copy of that message so I can have them killed? Earthlink is run by moony scoundrels but they have my web page and I can't get it out, so I am stuck with them.

Nick

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 8:11 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/09/2014 07:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Ok. Great. Where would you like to start?

Well, we've already started. See Marcus' post, my response, and Steve's response. I tried to send a private message to you to see if you wanted to take a one-on-one conversation off line. But my e-mails were rejected by Earthlink ... it reminded me of those yards around are neighborhood plastered with "Keep Out", "No Trespassing", "Beware of Dog" signs all over the trees, on the fence, etc. ;-) ... bringing "get off my lawn" to the internet!

--
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
At the way she's jerking and grinding your gears

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Robert J. Cordingley

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

I think this works for awhile but since it's a positive feedback system
(making the rules gets you more gold) it eventually breaks or has to be
intervened. So when the revolution comes we know who will be first
against the wall/sent to the guillotine/sent packing. Following an
undetermined period it starts all over again (Chinese
commu-plutocrats). May be it even follows the prey-predator model? The
question I have is where is America in the cycle?

Robert C

On 1/9/14 2:18 PM, glen wrote:
> A better aphorism is "He who has the gold rules."

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels

On 01/09/2014 07:48 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> I'm told that in some countries like Sri Lanka, money comes with power,
> rather than power with money.
> Make an appropriate tax table, or send out the military intelligence to
> deal with these people that fancy themselves as the deciders.

On 01/10/2014 07:30 AM, Robert J. Cordingley wrote:
> I think this works for awhile but since it's a positive feedback system
> (making the rules gets you more gold) it eventually breaks or has to be
> intervened.

I can't help but wonder what an alternative looks like. It strikes me
that money and power will always correlate. After all, money is really
nothing more than a medium for power. Even if you had some limited
power (say in some limited number of dimensions ... like being able to
lift really heavy objects - Schwarzenegger, or by ... twerking - ??), it
seems reasonable to use that power to make money. Then that money
becomes a medium for other powers you didn't previously have.

So, by my requirements for rationality, I'm way behind, here, because I
can't really imagine an alternative. The people with the money have the
power and the people with the power have the money.

> So when the revolution comes we know who will be first
> against the wall/sent to the guillotine/sent packing. Following an
> undetermined period it starts all over again (Chinese
> commu-plutocrats). May be it even follows the prey-predator model? The
> question I have is where is America in the cycle?

Excellent suggestion. Perhaps what we need to consider are the
_transients_, the amount of time it takes one to turn power into money
or money into power. Herein might lie a significant difference between
information rich cultures and information poor cultures. Information
rich cultures have lots of wiggle room for _dissent_, casting doubt on
any given authority figure. And although on the one hand, it may be
easy to turn some small power you have into a reasonable amount of
money, there's still plenty of inertia between lots of money and making
the rules. Yes, you can almost buy a seat in congress. But that's not
a straightforward transaction. And even once you're there, it's a far
cry from sitting in the seat to getting legislation passed and signed
into law. Obama might be considered an aberration because his rise to
power was relatively quick.

Similarly, Bezos can buy the Washington Post and lobby/bribe various
legislators, but there is still daylight between him and rule-making, at
least the official rule-making. He still runs a corporate empire within
which he writes the rules.

Perhaps this brings us around to a classification of rule types? I
suspect the variety in the rule sets for North Korea is impoverished
compared to the variety in rule sets here in the States.

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

Glen,

Well, we have started. But I don't think we have made a good start. I would like to be arguing about something about which we agree there is probably a "truth of the matter." Now that might violate some libertarian's (or at least some postmodernists) principles from the start. Given that I am a classic silver spoon (well, at least Ikea flatware) bleeding-heart liberal, are there any questions, concerning which you think there is a Truth of the Matter, that you would like to argue about. Or do your values tell you that all opinions are “just” opinions?

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 8:11 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/09/2014 07:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Ok. Great. Where would you like to start?

Well, we've already started. See Marcus' post, my response, and Steve's response. I tried to send a private message to you to see if you wanted to take a one-on-one conversation off line. But my e-mails were rejected by Earthlink ... it reminded me of those yards around are neighborhood plastered with "Keep Out", "No Trespassing", "Beware of Dog" signs all over the trees, on the fence, etc. ;-) ... bringing "get off my lawn" to the internet!

⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella

At the way she's jerking and grinding your gears

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

Ah yes. Propose a nonsense topic, wait until it is shown to be nonsense,
they raise a vague follow-up
topic, and ask the other person to say something in particular for you.
Do you want to get your hands
dirty or just play professor?

Original email:
-----------------
From: Nick Thompson [hidden email]
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 13:43:26 -0700
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

Glen,

Well, we have started. But I don't think we have made a good start. I
would like to be arguing about
something about which we agree there is probably a "truth of the matter."
Now that might violate some
libertarian's (or at least some postmodernists) principles from the start.
Given that I am a classic silver
spoon (well, at least Ikea flatware) bleeding-heart liberal, are there any
questions, concerning which you
think there is a Truth of the Matter, that you would like to argue about.
Or do your values tell you that
all opinions are âjustâ opinions?

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 8:11 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/09/2014 07:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Ok. Great. Where would you like to start?

Well, we've already started. See Marcus' post, my response, and Steve's
response. I tried to send a
private message to you to see if you wanted to take a one-on-one
conversation off line. But my e-mails
were rejected by Earthlink ... it reminded me of those yards around are
neighborhood plastered with
"Keep Out", "No Trespassing", "Beware of Dog" signs all over the trees, on
the fence, etc. ;-) ... bringing
"get off my lawn" to the internet!

--

ââ glen e. p. ropella

At the way she's jerking and grinding your gears

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com>
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you?
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

On 01/10/2014 12:43 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Well, we have started. But I don't think we have made a good start. I would like to be arguing about something about which we agree there is probably a "truth of the matter." Now that might violate some libertarian's (or at least some postmodernists) principles from the start. Given that I am a classic silver spoon (well, at least Ikea flatware) bleeding-heart liberal, are there any questions, concerning which you think there is a Truth of the Matter, that you would like to argue about. Or do your values tell you that all opinions are “just” opinions?

Although Marcus' response was harsh, it was right. But I'll try to play
anyway.

I propose this Truth of the Matter:

The world is run by rich people and has always been run by rich people.

Now, there's plenty to argue about, there, some of it semantic (what
does "rich" mean, what does "run" mean, etc.). And there should be
plenty of evidence to cite to help decide whether it's reasonable or
not. I don't particularly _want_ to argue about this. I think it's
obviously true, but am willing to admit my ignorance and will gladly
change my mind.

If we end up agreeing that it's basically true, then maybe we can move on.

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

Yes. I agree. We might get into trouble later regarding understandings of rich, but mostly it's true. It tends to be less true in hunter gatherer groups where less dominant males tend to gang up and control their more successful colleagues. See Boehm's Democracy in the Forest. I think that's it. But ever since it became possible to store grains, sendentary societies have tended to be dominated by people who can corner the storeable resources.

In short let's go on.

(I am puzzled why you and Marcus seem to feel that any attempt to nail down our understandings of essential words is bad form or counter-productive, but we don't have to discuss that here or now.)

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 2:22 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/10/2014 12:43 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Well, we have started. But I don't think we have made a good start. I would like to be arguing about something about which we agree there is probably a "truth of the matter." Now that might violate some libertarian's (or at least some postmodernists) principles from the start. Given that I am a classic silver spoon (well, at least Ikea flatware) bleeding-heart liberal, are there any questions, concerning which you think there is a Truth of the Matter, that you would like to argue about. Or do your values tell you that all opinions are “just” opinions?

Although Marcus' response was harsh, it was right. But I'll try to play anyway.

I propose this Truth of the Matter:

The world is run by rich people and has always been run by rich people.

Now, there's plenty to argue about, there, some of it semantic (what does "rich" mean, what does "run" mean, etc.). And there should be plenty of evidence to cite to help decide whether it's reasonable or not. I don't particularly _want_ to argue about this. I think it's obviously true, but am willing to admit my ignorance and will gladly change my mind.

If we end up agreeing that it's basically true, then maybe we can move on.

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: right vs left

On 01/10/2014 02:31 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Yes. I agree. We might get into trouble later regarding understandings of rich, but mostly it's true. It tends to be less true in hunter gatherer groups where less dominant males tend to gang up and control their more successful colleagues. See Boehm's Democracy in the Forest. I think that's it. But ever since it became possible to store grains, sendentary societies have tended to be dominated by people who can corner the storeable resources.
>
> In short let's go on.

OK. So, as a descriptive fact: "He who has the gold rules." Now we go
back to Marcus' question: Does the aphorism mean "He who has the gold
_ought_ to rule"? At which point, I just reiterate my response, which is:

Since all we've ever known is "He who has the gold rules", what basis
can we possibly use to say that it ought to be any other way? What
other way is there?

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Gillian Densmore

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

Define right vs left: Steve Hawking can right good science, when left to his own devices.

(Rimshot: I'll be around all week)

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen,

Well, we have started. But I don't think we have made a good start. I would like to be arguing about something about which we agree there is probably a "truth of the matter." Now that might violate some libertarian's (or at least some postmodernists) principles from the start. Given that I am a classic silver spoon (well, at least Ikea flatware) bleeding-heart liberal, are there any questions, concerning which you think there is a Truth of the Matter, that you would like to argue about. Or do your values tell you that all opinions are “just” opinions?

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 8:11 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/09/2014 07:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Ok. Great. Where would you like to start?

Well, we've already started. See Marcus' post, my response, and Steve's response. I tried to send a private message to you to see if you wanted to take a one-on-one conversation off line. But my e-mails were rejected by Earthlink ... it reminded me of those yards around are neighborhood plastered with "Keep Out", "No Trespassing", "Beware of Dog" signs all over the trees, on the fence, etc. ;-) ... bringing "get off my lawn" to the internet!

--
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
At the way she's jerking and grinding your gears

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

Glen,

I hope this helps.

CONCLUSION:

There are examples of less ruling of the rich and, even if there were no such examples, a discussion of why it would be better if we had less such ruling would be useful.

ARGUMENTATION: I agreed to the proposition that the rich tend to have a dominant influence in societies in which resources are readily stored, including our own. So, while I might agree that it will always be more or less true, I might also believe that the less it is true, the better. Or, that a society in which it is less true is more likely to be stable and attractive to live in for the largest numbers of people..

(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.

(3) Your request is for what one of my favorite FRIAM friends calls "an existence proof". In other words, I have to provide an example that such a thing has ever existed, before I can make an argument that it ought to exist. Surely, an existence proof is desirable, but not necessary to planning. But now that you mention it, it occurs to me that the world might well be a better place now, if an existence proof had been required of the man who first proposed to make an atomic bomb.

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 3:42 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 01/10/2014 02:31 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Yes. I agree. We might get into trouble later regarding understandings of rich, but mostly it's true. It tends to be less true in hunter gatherer groups where less dominant males tend to gang up and control their more successful colleagues. See Boehm's Democracy in the Forest. I think that's it. But ever since it became possible to store grains, sendentary societies have tended to be dominated by people who can corner the storeable resources.

> In short let's go on.

OK. So, as a descriptive fact: "He who has the gold rules." Now we go back to Marcus' question: Does the aphorism mean "He who has the gold _ought_ to rule"? At which point, I just reiterate my response, which is:

Since all we've ever known is "He who has the gold rules", what basis can we possibly use to say that it ought to be any other way? What other way is there?

⇒⇐ glen

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Steve Smith

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

> On 01/10/2014 02:31 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>> Yes. I agree. We might get into trouble later regarding understandings of rich, but mostly it's true. It tends to be less true in hunter gatherer groups where less dominant males tend to gang up and control their more successful colleagues. See Boehm's Democracy in the Forest. I think that's it. But ever since it became possible to store grains, sendentary societies have tended to be dominated by people who can corner the storeable resources.
>>
>> In short let's go on.
> OK. So, as a descriptive fact: "He who has the gold rules." Now we go
> back to Marcus' question: Does the aphorism mean "He who has the gold
> _ought_ to rule"? At which point, I just reiterate my response, which is:
>
> Since all we've ever known is "He who has the gold rules", what basis
> can we possibly use to say that it ought to be any other way? What
> other way is there?

"She who has the gold rules they who value gold"
or the contrapositive of same?

That is another way.

Did I not already say this once?

- Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by glen ropella

On 1/10/14, 3:41 PM, glen wrote:
> OK. So, as a descriptive fact: "He who has the gold rules." Now we go
> back to Marcus' question: Does the aphorism mean "He who has the gold
> _ought_ to rule"? At which point, I just reiterate my response, which
> is: Since all we've ever known is "He who has the gold rules", what
> basis can we possibly use to say that it ought to be any other way?
> What other way is there?
Robert already mentioned a counter example: The Communists seizing
power from the Nationalists in China.
Similarly, greenbacks didn't make the difference in Vietnam. So another
way is spending lives and destroying things, not just employment and
bribery.

Ok, but going back to the thread about the proof of God's existence, one
of the conclusions in the proof was that "Everything that is the case is
so necessarily." And from that it can be concluded there is no free
will. If there is no free will, why talk about `ought'. That kind of
reasoning would make sense per the aphorism but I don't it is also a
descriptive fact. It's common but not universal -- even if the only
other time the aphorism doesn't hold true is in the during the part of
the suggested cycle where the wealthy are thrown up against a wall and
shot.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

On 1/10/14, 6:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.

For example (http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/03/27/outside-groups-spending-through-roof)

" Outside groups, including super PACs and nonprofit organizations, have spent almost four times more on the 2012 presidential campaign than comparable organizations spent at the same point in the 2008 cycle, an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings show."

Your relativist argument (and evidence like above to support it), and also historical observations made on this list have falsified "He who has the gold rules." as literal proposition. Given that it is falsified, pop the stack to go back to the discussion of how to have an individual from the left and an individual from the right reconcile their views `rationally'. Why ought he who has the gold rule? Why should property rights be respected in all situations or even in any? Why should those that have resources influence legislation? Why should the law be considered anything more than a factor in risk and reward decisions? I'm happy to go down the merry road of nihilism with you. Bring your favorite things. I'll wear my cargo pants with lots of pockets. Oh, never mind that wrench I'm carrying. I heard someone was having car trouble over the horizon.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

Marcus,

I guess I don’t follow. Perhaps others will clarify.

Best,

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 10:10 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 1/10/14, 6:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: right vs left

On 1/10/14, 10:45 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

I guess I don’t follow.

One can always deconstruct to the point that whatever we hold dear is arbitrary.
That's an exercise many people don't seem to do, for whatever reason. Maybe they find it upsetting.

The left draws from one set of premises, and the right draws from another set. A slowly-growing set of sets.
For given pairs of individuals on the left and right, the intersection of their respective draws can be empty.

Some of those premises can be informed by biology and the social sciences, others are preferences are just opinions like whether human life is sacred, and whether one generation should care at all about those that follow.

To be systematic about this thinking, make a simulation. Take some initial condition (a population with a distribution of wealth, connectivity of social networks, etc.) plug-in the premises as actions for a population of agents and iterate, moving money around, creating and losing friends, etc. Now take the same initial condition, plug-in the alternative premises, iterate the agents' decisions, and you'll get another outcome. Make them fight and contend over premises (as occurs in real life) and something else will happen in a virtual world. But is it about the journey or the destination? Do we care about the kind of decisions the agents get to make or what happens to them? If the agents are happily making decisions that they like (because they are enriching or easy or whatever) what difference does it make what happens in aggregate?

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Merle Lefkoff-2

Re: right vs left

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

I'm at the bottom of a long thread here, but if it's not too late, the only person I've ever read who could really describe the Right and the Left in America was Joe Bageant in his book "Deer Hunting with Jesus". It was a big loss when he died recently, because he also had a great blog.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Marcus,

I guess I don’t follow. Perhaps others will clarify.

Best,

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 10:10 PM
To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 1/10/14, 6:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.

For example (http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/03/27/outside-groups-spending-through-roof)

" Outside groups, including super PACs and nonprofit organizations, have spent almost four times more on the 2012 presidential campaign than comparable organizations spent at the same point in the 2008 cycle, an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings show."

Your relativist argument (and evidence like above to support it), and also historical observations made on this list have falsified "He who has the gold rules." as literal proposition. Given that it is falsified, pop the stack to go back to the discussion of how to have an individual from the left and an individual from the right reconcile their views `rationally'. Why ought he who has the gold rule? Why should property rights be respected in all situations or even in any? Why should those that have resources influence legislation? Why should the law be considered anything more than a factor in risk and reward decisions? I'm happy to go down the merry road of nihilism with you. Bring your favorite things. I'll wear my cargo pants with lots of pockets. Oh, never mind that wrench I'm carrying. I heard someone was having car trouble over the horizon.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merlelefkoff

Merle Lefkoff-2

Re: right vs left

Guys,

It's honestly been "the other way" a lot. There was even a time not too long ago in the U.S. when our government made "rational" decisions about this issue. In the mid 1950s, you were taxed on everything you made over $400k at 92%. The bottom bracket was taxed at 22%. In 2012, you were taxed on everything you made over $380k at 35%. The bottom bracket, up to $17k, was taxed at 10%. There are a lot of variables that affect inequality that can be changed, and that's just one of the smaller ones. I like Gillian's question, so here's mine: What do you mean by "rich"?

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Merle Lefkoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm at the bottom of a long thread here, but if it's not too late, the only person I've ever read who could really describe the Right and the Left in America was Joe Bageant in his book "Deer Hunting with Jesus". It was a big loss when he died recently, because he also had a great blog.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Marcus,

I guess I don’t follow. Perhaps others will clarify.

Best,

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 10:10 PM
To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 1/10/14, 6:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.

For example (http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/03/27/outside-groups-spending-through-roof)

" Outside groups, including super PACs and nonprofit organizations, have spent almost four times more on the 2012 presidential campaign than comparable organizations spent at the same point in the 2008 cycle, an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings show."

Your relativist argument (and evidence like above to support it), and also historical observations made on this list have falsified "He who has the gold rules." as literal proposition. Given that it is falsified, pop the stack to go back to the discussion of how to have an individual from the left and an individual from the right reconcile their views `rationally'. Why ought he who has the gold rule? Why should property rights be respected in all situations or even in any? Why should those that have resources influence legislation? Why should the law be considered anything more than a factor in risk and reward decisions? I'm happy to go down the merry road of nihilism with you. Bring your favorite things. I'll wear my cargo pants with lots of pockets. Oh, never mind that wrench I'm carrying. I heard someone was having car trouble over the horizon.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: <a href="tel:%28303%29%20859-5609" value="+13038595609" target="_blank">(303) 859-5609
skype: merlelefkoff

--
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merlelefkoff

Nick Thompson

Re: right vs left

Top 50% of wealth OR income? By which standard, most of us on this list are rich.

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Merle Lefkoff
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 1:17 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

Guys,

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Merle Lefkoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm at the bottom of a long thread here, but if it's not too late, the only person I've ever read who could really describe the Right and the Left in America was Joe Bageant in his book "Deer Hunting with Jesus". It was a big loss when he died recently, because he also had a great blog.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
Marcus,

I guess I don’t follow. Perhaps others will clarify.

Best,

Nick

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

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 10:10 PM
To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] right vs left

On 1/10/14, 6:28 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
(2) Second, given that understanding of what I agreed to, there ARE examples where the rich are not as dominant as the rich are in our current society. In fact, not long ago, we were such a society.
For example (http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/03/27/outside-groups-spending-through-roof)

" Outside groups, including super PACs and nonprofit organizations, have spent almost four times more on the 2012 presidential campaign than comparable organizations spent at the same point in the 2008 cycle, an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings show."

Your relativist argument (and evidence like above to support it), and also historical observations made on this list have falsified "He who has the gold rules." as literal proposition. Given that it is falsified, pop the stack to go back to the discussion of how to have an individual from the left and an individual from the right reconcile their views `rationally'. Why ought he who has the gold rule? Why should property rights be respected in all situations or even in any? Why should those that have resources influence legislation? Why should the law be considered anything more than a factor in risk and reward decisions? I'm happy to go down the merry road of nihilism with you. Bring your favorite things. I'll wear my cargo pants with lots of pockets. Oh, never mind that wrench I'm carrying. I heard someone was having car trouble over the horizon.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: <a href="tel:%28303%29%20859-5609" target="_blank">(303) 859-5609
skype: merlelefkoff

--
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merlelefkoff

1 ... 3456789 ... 12