Friam

Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Classic

List

Threaded

67 messages Options

1234

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Jon

I can't even find MacLane's book for sale anywhere, at any price. Oh well, I need to read Lawvere anyway.

Frank

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

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

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

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

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am

unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation

of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-

determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing

that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things

out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank

you in advance.

Jon

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Frank,

same.

Jon

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by Frank Wimberly-2

What was the film in which Dustin Hoffman played an autistic(?) presidential candidate? He would say something that he meant quite literally and people would assume he was speaking m.......ically and that he was brilliant.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Steve Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by jon zingale

Jon -

I might instead say that the source domain of the metaphorical description of "bent" or "curved" space IS the formal mathematical construction of "a manifold"?

What about Eddington's measurement or gravitational lensing? These both

appear situated in a phenomenological domain, and so we seem to have

another candidate domain for talking meaningfully about bent or curved space.

I guess I'm not saying that nobody (in this case Eddington and many others after him) have not experimentally observed light failing to follow the Euclidean "straight line" we intuitively? expect to see? I agree that we don't have any (much?) direct experience otherwise (mirage, underwater with density/temp flux?). I'm still harping on "bent" as it implies that something was "meant to be straight is deformed by some process or force"?.

Still, I suspect I am missing something important in

your emphasis on apprehension. Can you say a bit more about what you mean?

I'm not sure if it is important... or obvious... or not. I am using "apprehension" to be as broad of a word/concept as possible to describe "taking something in", it could range from observing to experiencing to measuring (and fitting to an apt model?) to "intuiting" to grokking? I guess the key is being convinced that what you are "taking in" is real, even of course, if you are wrong. This might include Dave's conversations with Joseph Smith, though that would be on one extreme.

you write:

Which I think is analogous or at least similar to Guerin's "least action paths"?

Yeah, I suspect so too. MacLane's book intentionally focuses on developing

Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics. Mechanics, as far as I am concerned,

is the prototypical home for these ideas.

At least from an embodied, motile creature's perspective, it seems like it would be? Not that I can imagine being anything else really? My orbital mechanics dreams are just the latest variant on a whole suite of dreams I've had as far as I can remember and they all involve various forms of locomotion/navigation through space (flying, levitating, soaring, running, jumping, seven-leaguing, swimming, swinging from branches, spidermanning, surfing, skiing, skating, tumbling, etc.).

You write:

feels a bit more to me like an "algebra of cliche's"?

Thanks for that. Upon further reflection, I completely agree with you.

And thank you for "snowclone" between you and Glen, I am feeling hopelessly out of date on modern terminology. I feel like my grandfather (born 1890ish) when he came to live with us in the 60's, and it felt like he had to have explained every other term that I didn't even recognize as slang! ("hey man", "cool").

†) At the unintended risk of moving the conversation into the meta††,

I am including a link here to a page motivating the development of sheaves.

In section 2 the author invents a game where he thinks up a space and the

player can query the author about how other spaces map into it.

†† Meta in that sheaves themselves offer a more flexible paradigm for

reasoning about generalized spaces than we get from manifold theory.

I'm gonna have to give this a lot more attention than the quick read I tried just now!

I'm barely versed enough in CT to *read* it with a lexicon in my hand.

- Steve

David Eric Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by jon zingale

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Yes, sorry about a thread-rudeness. I had sort of dropped a chunk of something that had been accumulating for a week in the middle of your thread which was in the coarse of solving other problems, where it didn’t belong. Partly this was because yours had been the latest snapshot, partly it was because the overall frame you and Glen and Steve are building is one that I would like to think of my own additions as finding a place in, and partly I was probably using the measured tone of this sub-thread as cover, since my own was rather crabby and aggressive. Strange that it seemed formally impolite to me, to use your thread as a point of departure and not direct the salutation to you, while I blew past the fact that it was substantively rude to use the thread, rather than to participate in it.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

thompnickson2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by Frank Wimberly-2

Being There Chauncy Gardener. “I like to watch”

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 7:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Thanks, Nick! I would not have retrieved that.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 9:12 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Being There Chauncy Gardener. “I like to watch”

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 7:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

What was the film in which Dustin Hoffman played an autistic(?) presidential candidate? He would say something that he meant quite literally and people would assume he was speaking m.......ically and that he was brilliant.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

thompnickson2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by David Eric Smith

All –

I feel norm formation going on here, and it is making me a bit nervous. I am not sure what follows from that, but there it is. I thing that we at FriAM have long worked the boundary between work and play. I think that’s where the best work is done.

But this is my thread, right? Can a man bust his own thread? I d o n t t h I n k s o. I want to talk about metaphor. And it’s relation to models. And it’ relation to the concept of intentionality. The question is, To what extent do our norms allow me to bring those concerns to other threads. And the answer I am hearing from many of you is, “Less than I have been”.

Well, I will do my best. But, for instance, I think the “work” we did on “strawman” was tremendously important. In my introductory graduate lectures at Berkeley, where, one by one, the the grey-backed gorillas of the department laid down the law. Somebody, I think David Krech, announced that if “I say that the number of rat turds left by a rat in an open field maze is “anxiety”, then that is what anxiety IS for the purposes of my research, and there’s no more discussion to be had.” And even in the tenuous position of a first year graduate student I knew that was wrong. Meanings have momentum. Words have meaning that is independent of their users. I have fought for 50 years to rescue ‘teleonomy’ (=natural design) from the dualistic thieves that abducted it. And SteveG and I could be thought of as battling for nigh a decade and half about which specification of the metaphor of natural selection is best for the purposes of understanding natural design. (I thought we made a lot of progress on that issue today.) Much of what we do in scientific discourse is fight over metaphors and we need to develop methods for fighting fairly, skillfully, and expeditiously.

I don’t think I have EVER introduced the idea of metaphor in a conversation where I didn’t think a clarification or specification of the metaphors implicit in our conversation might move the discussion forward. I may be playing with words but I am not just playing with words. God knows, I may have been WRONG in many cases, but I absolutely defend the idea that attention to the metaphors at play in a conversation is often essential to any development of understanding or convergence of opinion.

Is it always? No. Of course not. And I will try to be more careful about that.

Thanks, as always, for all your thoughts. My life would not be half of what it is without them. Really. It’s perhaps pathetic for me to admit that, but it’s true.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 9:11 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Eric,

Cool, I misunderstood is all. I very much appreciate what you

accumulate for a week and drop. I would be sorry to not have it,

so please do what you need. Thank you for drawing my attention

to polysemy and its operational relation to overloading, which in

turn I am connecting to polymorphism (computing not biology).

What I am hearing is polysemy is not a metaphor and that both

have a role to play in our denotational language games. Further,

these games are only interesting if they assist in exploring new

domains. In the meantime, you advocate for not making the

collaborative explorations harder on ourselves than we need.

Hell, there is a lot of work to be done so let's not rewrite Russell's

Principia.

Jon

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Steve,

you write:

I'm still harping on "bent" as it implies that something was "meant to be straight is deformed by some process or force"?.

Oh, I misapprehended the critique. Yeah, bent like normie where there is

a whole context and a basis for comparison. However bent, unlike normie,

is relegated to a supporting role. I suppose this is why we came to speak

of geodesics in the first place, you had already mentioned this too it seems

in your writings on cartographic projections and great circle routes.

flying, levitating, soaring, running, jumping, seven-leaguing, swimming, swinging from branches, spidermanning, surfing, skiing, skating, tumbling, etc.

Ha, a very nice list. I had to look up seven-leaguing, though spidermaning

gave me nostalgia for staring out of car windows on long road trips as

a small child. I would fantasize that some humanoid was spidermanning

after the car along the telephone lines.

Jon

David Eric Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Nick, for the record, and this will not change from my end:

Your right to be interested in whatever you are interested in is sacrosanct, here or in any other forum. I don’t think there are thread boundaries on that, though there are all the normal courtesies which I see more clearly for a while after I transgress one.

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 1:03 PM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:

All –

I feel norm formation going on here, and it is making me a bit nervous. I am not sure what follows from that, but there it is. I thing that we at FriAM have long worked the boundary between work and play. I think that’s where the best work is done.

But this is my thread, right? Can a man bust his own thread?  I d o n t t h I n k s o. I want to talk about metaphor. And it’s relation to models. And it’ relation to the concept of intentionality. The question is, To what extent do our norms allow me to bring those concerns to other threads. And the answer I am hearing from many of you is, “Less than I have been”.

Well, I will do my best. But, for instance, I think the “work” we did on “strawman” was tremendously important. In my introductory graduate lectures at Berkeley, where, one by one, the the grey-backed gorillas of the department laid down the law. Somebody, I think David Krech, announced that if “I say that the number of rat turds left by a rat in an open field maze is “anxiety”, then that is what anxiety IS for the purposes of my research, and there’s no more discussion to be had.” And even in the tenuous position of a first year graduate student I knew that was wrong. Meanings have momentum. Words have meaning that is independent of their users. I have fought for 50 years to rescue ‘teleonomy’ (=natural design) from the dualistic thieves that abducted it. And SteveG and I could be thought of as battling for nigh a decade and half about which specification of the metaphor of natural selection is best for the purposes of understanding natural design. (I thought we made a lot of progress on that issue today.) Much of what we do in scientific discourse is fight over metaphors and we need to develop methods for fighting fairly, skillfully, and expeditiously.

I don’t think I have EVER introduced the idea of metaphor in a conversation where I didn’t think a clarification or specification of the metaphors implicit in our conversation might move the discussion forward. I may be playing with words but I am not just playing with words. God knows, I may have been WRONG in many cases, but I absolutely defend the idea that attention to the metaphors at play in a conversation is often essential to any development of understanding or convergence of opinion.

Is it always? No. Of course not. And I will try to be more careful about that.

Thanks, as always, for all your thoughts. My life would not be half of what it is without them.   Really. It’s perhaps pathetic for me to admit that, but it’s true.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 9:11 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Yes, sorry about a thread-rudeness. I had sort of dropped a chunk of something that had been accumulating for a week in the middle of your thread which was in the coarse of solving other problems, where it didn’t belong. Partly this was because yours had been the latest snapshot, partly it was because the overall frame you and Glen and Steve are building is one that I would like to think of my own additions as finding a place in, and partly I was probably using the measured tone of this sub-thread as cover, since my own was rather crabby and aggressive. Strange that it seemed formally impolite to me, to use your thread as a point of departure and not direct the salutation to you, while I blew past the fact that it was substantively rude to use the thread, rather than to participate in it.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

Steve Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I think I just saw Marcus blocking 880 in Oakland!

Nick, for the record, and this will not change from my end:

Your right to be interested in whatever you are interested in is sacrosanct, here or in any other forum. I don’t think there are thread boundaries on that, though there are all the normal courtesies which I see more clearly for a while after I transgress one.

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 1:03 PM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:

All –

I feel norm formation going on here, and it is making me a bit nervous. I am not sure what follows from that, but there it is. I thing that we at FriAM have long worked the boundary between work and play. I think that’s where the best work is done.

But this is my thread, right? Can a man bust his own thread?  I d o n t t h I n k s o. I want to talk about metaphor. And it’s relation to models. And it’ relation to the concept of intentionality. The question is, To what extent do our norms allow me to bring those concerns to other threads. And the answer I am hearing from many of you is, “Less than I have been”.

Well, I will do my best. But, for instance, I think the “work” we did on “strawman” was tremendously important. In my introductory graduate lectures at Berkeley, where, one by one, the the grey-backed gorillas of the department laid down the law. Somebody, I think David Krech, announced that if “I say that the number of rat turds left by a rat in an open field maze is “anxiety”, then that is what anxiety IS for the purposes of my research, and there’s no more discussion to be had.” And even in the tenuous position of a first year graduate student I knew that was wrong. Meanings have momentum. Words have meaning that is independent of their users. I have fought for 50 years to rescue ‘teleonomy’ (=natural design) from the dualistic thieves that abducted it. And SteveG and I could be thought of as battling for nigh a decade and half about which specification of the metaphor of natural selection is best for the purposes of understanding natural design. (I thought we made a lot of progress on that issue today.) Much of what we do in scientific discourse is fight over metaphors and we need to develop methods for fighting fairly, skillfully, and expeditiously.

I don’t think I have EVER introduced the idea of metaphor in a conversation where I didn’t think a clarification or specification of the metaphors implicit in our conversation might move the discussion forward. I may be playing with words but I am not just playing with words. God knows, I may have been WRONG in many cases, but I absolutely defend the idea that attention to the metaphors at play in a conversation is often essential to any development of understanding or convergence of opinion.

Is it always? No. Of course not. And I will try to be more careful about that.

Thanks, as always, for all your thoughts. My life would not be half of what it is without them.   Really. It’s perhaps pathetic for me to admit that, but it’s true.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 9:11 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Yes, sorry about a thread-rudeness. I had sort of dropped a chunk of something that had been accumulating for a week in the middle of your thread which was in the coarse of solving other problems, where it didn’t belong. Partly this was because yours had been the latest snapshot, partly it was because the overall frame you and Glen and Steve are building is one that I would like to think of my own additions as finding a place in, and partly I was probably using the measured tone of this sub-thread as cover, since my own was rather crabby and aggressive. Strange that it seemed formally impolite to me, to use your thread as a point of departure and not direct the salutation to you, while I blew past the fact that it was substantively rude to use the thread, rather than to participate in it.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am

unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation

of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-

determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing

that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things

out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank

you in advance.

Jon

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

David Eric Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by jon zingale

Thanks Jon,

Yes, I would also follow your associations to overloading and computer formal-language theory; they seem very natural and close to hand to me as well. It’s challenging because the number of category terms proliferates fast, and each of them is in some way a window on aspects of the symbol-referent relation. But too many at once also become hard to juggle.

I think I was trying to carve out some argument that it means _something_ for there to be a primary referent-role of a word to whatever it points to, and that there can also be aspects of reference that are somehow indirect, and derived from association proximity to other word-referent pairs. I have tended to think of the polysemy concept as trying to capture however much of a primary referent role there can be of a word to multiple targets, whereas the metaphorical aspect seems to me to be mainly about the aspects of reference inherited from the word overloading, or the way the word brings in a usage-context overloading, or priming neighborhood effects, etc. But not only that, also the framing DaveW gave a few days ago, that metaphor has an especially primary role in the transient, between initial unfamiliarity and the later solidification of primary-reference roles.

But I take Nick’s post seriously here too. He and EricC have a lifetime commitment and a professional working knowledge of the full toolset of structured thinking in this area, and Frank has a considerable investment to have acquired significant chunks of it. I want to remember that they are choosing what questions they think are interesting not in a vacuum, but with a view to what those tools can do and have already done.

All best,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 1:07 PM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

Cool, I misunderstood is all. I very much appreciate what you
accumulate for a week and drop. I would be sorry to not have it,
so please do what you need. Thank you for drawing my attention
to polysemy and its operational relation to overloading, which in
turn I am connecting to polymorphism (computing not biology).
What I am hearing is polysemy is not a metaphor and that both
have a role to play in our denotational language games. Further,
these games are only interesting if they assist in exploring new
domains. In the meantime, you advocate for not making the
collaborative explorations harder on ourselves than we need.
Hell, there is a lot of work to be done so let's not rewrite Russell's
Principia.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by Steve Smith

Piedmont, for example, has a higher per capita income than Beverly Hills.

On the other hand if one wants to drag a newspaper dispenser into the street and use it as a shield from rubber bullets, that’s an option too. Oakland has got it all!

I mentioned this hackery. Fun.

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2019/09/09/whos-been-hacking-digital-traffic-signs-in-berkeley

I saw someone on MSNBC tonight dreading the “global anarchists”. Seriously?

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Steve Smith <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, May 29, 2020 at 10:03 PM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I think I just saw Marcus blocking 880 in Oakland!

Nick, for the record, and this will not change from my end:

Your right to be interested in whatever you are interested in is sacrosanct, here or in any other forum. I don’t think there are thread boundaries on that, though there are all the normal courtesies which I see more clearly for a while after I transgress one.

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 1:03 PM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:

All –

I feel norm formation going on here, and it is making me a bit nervous. I am not sure what follows from that, but there it is. I thing that we at FriAM have long worked the boundary between work and play. I think that’s where the best work is done.

But this is my thread, right? Can a man bust his own thread?  I d o n t t h I n k s o. I want to talk about metaphor. And it’s relation to models. And it’ relation to the concept of intentionality. The question is, To what extent do our norms allow me to bring those concerns to other threads. And the answer I am hearing from many of you is, “Less than I have been”.

Well, I will do my best. But, for instance, I think the “work” we did on “strawman” was tremendously important. In my introductory graduate lectures at Berkeley, where, one by one, the the grey-backed gorillas of the department laid down the law. Somebody, I think David Krech, announced that if “I say that the number of rat turds left by a rat in an open field maze is “anxiety”, then that is what anxiety IS for the purposes of my research, and there’s no more discussion to be had.” And even in the tenuous position of a first year graduate student I knew that was wrong. Meanings have momentum. Words have meaning that is independent of their users. I have fought for 50 years to rescue ‘teleonomy’ (=natural design) from the dualistic thieves that abducted it. And SteveG and I could be thought of as battling for nigh a decade and half about which specification of the metaphor of natural selection is best for the purposes of understanding natural design. (I thought we made a lot of progress on that issue today.) Much of what we do in scientific discourse is fight over metaphors and we need to develop methods for fighting fairly, skillfully, and expeditiously.

I don’t think I have EVER introduced the idea of metaphor in a conversation where I didn’t think a clarification or specification of the metaphors implicit in our conversation might move the discussion forward. I may be playing with words but I am not just playing with words. God knows, I may have been WRONG in many cases, but I absolutely defend the idea that attention to the metaphors at play in a conversation is often essential to any development of understanding or convergence of opinion.

Is it always? No. Of course not. And I will try to be more careful about that.

Thanks, as always, for all your thoughts. My life would not be half of what it is without them.   Really. It’s perhaps pathetic for me to admit that, but it’s true.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 9:11 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Yes, sorry about a thread-rudeness. I had sort of dropped a chunk of something that had been accumulating for a week in the middle of your thread which was in the coarse of solving other problems, where it didn’t belong. Partly this was because yours had been the latest snapshot, partly it was because the overall frame you and Glen and Steve are building is one that I would like to think of my own additions as finding a place in, and partly I was probably using the measured tone of this sub-thread as cover, since my own was rather crabby and aggressive. Strange that it seemed formally impolite to me, to use your thread as a point of departure and not direct the salutation to you, while I blew past the fact that it was substantively rude to use the thread, rather than to participate in it.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am

unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation

of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-

determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing

that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things

out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank

you in advance.

Jon

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

Steve Smith

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

On one of my first trips to the Bay Area I remember driving up telegraph? into Berzerkley and saw a "Bank of America" sign that had been very artfully re-designed to say "Bank of Apartheid"

I've a good friend in Berk who said tonight that he was expecting the grey haired hippies and beats to "March on Peets" at sunrise. He's still mostly pepper with a little salt, and post-boomer himself.

Piedmont, for example, has a higher per capita income than Beverly Hills.

On the other hand if one wants to drag a newspaper dispenser into the street and use it as a shield from rubber bullets, that’s an option too. Oakland has got it all!

I mentioned this hackery. Fun.

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2019/09/09/whos-been-hacking-digital-traffic-signs-in-berkeley

I saw someone on MSNBC tonight dreading the “global anarchists”. Seriously?

From: Friam [hidden email] on behalf of Steve Smith [hidden email]
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Date: Friday, May 29, 2020 at 10:03 PM
To: [hidden email] [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I think I just saw Marcus blocking 880 in Oakland!
Nick, for the record, and this will not change from my end:

Your right to be interested in whatever you are interested in is sacrosanct, here or in any other forum. I don’t think there are thread boundaries on that, though there are all the normal courtesies which I see more clearly for a while after I transgress one.

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 1:03 PM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:

All –

I feel norm formation going on here, and it is making me a bit nervous. I am not sure what follows from that, but there it is. I thing that we at FriAM have long worked the boundary between work and play. I think that’s where the best work is done.

But this is my thread, right? Can a man bust his own thread?  I d o n t t h I n k s o. I want to talk about metaphor. And it’s relation to models. And it’ relation to the concept of intentionality. The question is, To what extent do our norms allow me to bring those concerns to other threads. And the answer I am hearing from many of you is, “Less than I have been”.

Well, I will do my best. But, for instance, I think the “work” we did on “strawman” was tremendously important. In my introductory graduate lectures at Berkeley, where, one by one, the the grey-backed gorillas of the department laid down the law. Somebody, I think David Krech, announced that if “I say that the number of rat turds left by a rat in an open field maze is “anxiety”, then that is what anxiety IS for the purposes of my research, and there’s no more discussion to be had.” And even in the tenuous position of a first year graduate student I knew that was wrong. Meanings have momentum. Words have meaning that is independent of their users. I have fought for 50 years to rescue ‘teleonomy’ (=natural design) from the dualistic thieves that abducted it. And SteveG and I could be thought of as battling for nigh a decade and half about which specification of the metaphor of natural selection is best for the purposes of understanding natural design. (I thought we made a lot of progress on that issue today.) Much of what we do in scientific discourse is fight over metaphors and we need to develop methods for fighting fairly, skillfully, and expeditiously.

I don’t think I have EVER introduced the idea of metaphor in a conversation where I didn’t think a clarification or specification of the metaphors implicit in our conversation might move the discussion forward. I may be playing with words but I am not just playing with words. God knows, I may have been WRONG in many cases, but I absolutely defend the idea that attention to the metaphors at play in a conversation is often essential to any development of understanding or convergence of opinion.

Is it always? No. Of course not. And I will try to be more careful about that.

Thanks, as always, for all your thoughts. My life would not be half of what it is without them.   Really. It’s perhaps pathetic for me to admit that, but it’s true.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 9:11 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Hi Jon,

No, actually not any issue with any of what you had posted, as also just affirmation toward various historical posts by Glen.

Yes, sorry about a thread-rudeness. I had sort of dropped a chunk of something that had been accumulating for a week in the middle of your thread which was in the coarse of solving other problems, where it didn’t belong. Partly this was because yours had been the latest snapshot, partly it was because the overall frame you and Glen and Steve are building is one that I would like to think of my own additions as finding a place in, and partly I was probably using the measured tone of this sub-thread as cover, since my own was rather crabby and aggressive. Strange that it seemed formally impolite to me, to use your thread as a point of departure and not direct the salutation to you, while I blew past the fact that it was substantively rude to use the thread, rather than to participate in it.

Very good. Thanks for calling me on this,

Eric

On May 30, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am

unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation

of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-

determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing

that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things

out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank

you in advance.

Jon

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

Prof David West

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

but not Dustin Hoffman -- Peter Sellers.

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 9:11 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

Being There Chauncy Gardener. “I like to watch”

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 7:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

What was the film in which Dustin Hoffman played an autistic(?) presidential candidate? He would say something that he meant quite literally and people would assume he was speaking m.......ically and that he was brilliant.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Even better.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sat, May 30, 2020, 7:46 AM Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:

but not Dustin Hoffman -- Peter Sellers.

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 9:11 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
Being There Chauncy Gardener. “I like to watch”

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 7:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

What was the film in which Dustin Hoffman played an autistic(?) presidential candidate? He would say something that he meant quite literally and people would assume he was speaking m.......ically and that he was brilliant.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have been much more active in the List that usual. It's the pandemic.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:43 PM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Eric,

I am not sure that I disagree with you anywhere, but I am
unsure whether you are taking issue with me? The proliferation
of threads are sometimes hard for me to follow, inevitably I mis-
determine who is talking to whom. Are there places in my writing
that you would suggest I revisit and reconsider? Pointing things
out to another can be an expensive and thankless task, so thank
you in advance.

Jon
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

--
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
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/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by jon zingale

Excellent, Jon.

On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right triangle, here's a classic one

{(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)}

and here's a manifold

{(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of S^2.

Note these are not physical objects.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

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

1234