Friam

Myth of the Given

Classic

List

Threaded

13 messages Options

jon zingale

Myth of the Given

"Maybe postmodernism itself stands between me and screen..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we6cwmzhbBE

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Prof David West

Re: Myth of the Given

Some reactions to Bonevac's lecture.

1) The only place where postmodernism continues to hold influence is among leftist academics and politics, e.g. gender studies, ethnic studies, a portion of BLM, Antifa rhetoric (talk by self-identified folk - make no claim as to whether a "movement" as such exists), revisionist history, etc. etc.

2) Yes!! to Quine.

3) the enlightenment slide — my alternative, with a totally different meaning of "enlightenment:"

Enlightenment

There is independent Truth.

There is no independent objective knowledge of IT - only direct, unmediated, apprehension.

Reason is the Great Deceiver!

Acting rationally, as if the actor and her reason had any effect, is attached action and ensures failure and misery.

davew

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020, at 11:01 AM, jon zingale wrote:

> "Maybe postmodernism itself stands between me and screen..."

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we6cwmzhbBE

> --

> Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .

> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam

> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
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: Myth of the Given

I rather liked his characterization of Derrida's work as *all is text*, and
that the best we can do from the privileged perspective of logos is to
compare descriptions.

[1] "As analytic philosophers might prefer to put it, thought and language
are capable of determining things only up to isomorphism".

[2] "If that's right, there's no principled difference between describing
reality and describing a system of signs, a text, language itself".

Through the lens of Lawvere's fixed point theorem, I am compelled to think
of Derrida's idea as Godel incompleteness for logos itself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NddnaeZ03JE

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Prof David West

Re: Myth of the Given

Derrida is the "pure mathematician" of text. Doesn't make him right or meaningful, but he makes for some interesting abstract games. His text is second only to Foucalt in its impenetrability

davew
.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020, at 3:55 PM, jon zingale wrote:

> I rather liked his characterization of Derrida's work as *all is text*, and
> that the best we can do from the privileged perspective of logos is to
> compare descriptions.
>
> [1] "As analytic philosophers might prefer to put it, thought and language
> are capable of determining things only up to isomorphism".
>
> [2] "If that's right, there's no principled difference between describing
> reality and describing a system of signs, a text, language itself".
>
> Through the lens of Lawvere's fixed point theorem, I am compelled to think
> of Derrida's idea as Godel incompleteness for logos itself:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NddnaeZ03JE
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

jon zingale

Re: Myth of the Given

Haha, yeah, I really like his style. Unlike Foucault, who in my opinion is
too focused on power for my personal reading tastes, Derrida seems to write
what he does for the pure pleasure of the hunt. His 'Of Grammatology' is one
of those books that I cannot read often or easily, but when I do slow down
enough to sit with it, I feel like I walk away with something cool.

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Steve Smith

Re: Myth of the Given

In reply to this post by jon zingale

Jon -

I definitely appreciated the balance of the lecturer's animated style
and a seemingly accurate/complete description.

I have a hard time dismissing more than the Snarky part of PoMo
theory/culture, even though I'm not an adherent in any obvous way.

I appreciate your observations here: I reacted to Derrida from the
start (my first encounter 20 years after he wrote/spoke) but this guy
helped relieve that with his treatment.

- Steve

jon zingale

Re: Myth of the Given

With respect to Foucault, I wish to express gratitude to him for his
introduction to 'Madness and Civilization'[⛵]. He gives a brief and
engaging account of how the treatment of madmen in European society
underwent a notable inversion, and to my unkeen eye, one paralleled in
both the treatment of garbage and conception of national parks in the
west. Foucault recounts:

"Renaissance men developed a delightful, yet horrible way of dealing with
their mad denizens: they were put on a ship and entrusted to mariners
because folly, water, and sea, as everyone then "knew," had an affinity
for each other. Thus, "Ships of Fools" crisscrossed the seas and canals
of Europe with their comic and pathetic cargo of souls. Some of them
found pleasure and even a cure in the changing surroundings, in the
isolation of being cast off, while others withdrew further, became worse,
or died alone and away from their families. The cities and villages which
had thus rid themselves of their crazed and crazy, could now take
pleasure in watching the exciting sideshow when a ship full of foreign
lunatics would dock at their harbors."

In other words, Europe's madmen were relegated to a life of perpetual
*outside*. But soon for polite Renaissance society, this quickly became
a nuisance, and leper colonies slowly came to replace their lepers with
madmen. Inside became the new outside. Similarly, it no longer made sense
to throw one's slop and filth from the window and into the streets below.
Comically, Europe took a little longer (the 1800s), than with their
madmen, to realize that *outside* was just no good[♨]. A paradigm shift
in the west focused on designating landfills to *contain* and cover
society's waste. Finally, as the compact manifold, we call Earth bore for
us no more wilderness to discover, her denizens quickly realized their
need for it. Special *inside* outsides came to be designated as national
parks, an outside with an entrance fee, spaces where one pays not to
re-enter society, but to leave it.

[⛵]
https://monoskop.org/images/1/14/Foucault_Michel_Madness_and_Civilization_A_History_of_Insanity_in_the_Age_of_Reason.pdf

[♨] https://www.qmul.ac.uk/geog/research/research-projects/historiclandfill/

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Eric Charles-2

Re: Myth of the Given

A totally sensible position: "We can treat just about anything as if it is text, and given the sophistication of our ability to deal with text, that should lead to some insights."

A totally bullshit position that no one should ever have tolerated for a minute: "Everything is text."

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020, 12:01 AM jon zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

With respect to Foucault, I wish to express gratitude to him for his
introduction to 'Madness and Civilization'[⛵]. He gives a brief and
engaging account of how the treatment of madmen in European society
underwent a notable inversion, and to my unkeen eye, one paralleled in
both the treatment of garbage and conception of national parks in the
west. Foucault recounts:

"Renaissance men developed a delightful, yet horrible way of dealing with
their mad denizens: they were put on a ship and entrusted to mariners
because folly, water, and sea, as everyone then "knew," had an affinity
for each other. Thus, "Ships of Fools" crisscrossed the seas and canals
of Europe with their comic and pathetic cargo of souls. Some of them
found pleasure and even a cure in the changing surroundings, in the
isolation of being cast off, while others withdrew further, became worse,
or died alone and away from their families. The cities and villages which
had thus rid themselves of their crazed and crazy, could now take
pleasure in watching the exciting sideshow when a ship full of foreign
lunatics would dock at their harbors."

In other words, Europe's madmen were relegated to a life of perpetual
*outside*. But soon for polite Renaissance society, this quickly became
a nuisance, and leper colonies slowly came to replace their lepers with
madmen. Inside became the new outside. Similarly, it no longer made sense
to throw one's slop and filth from the window and into the streets below.
Comically, Europe took a little longer (the 1800s), than with their
madmen, to realize that *outside* was just no good[♨]. A paradigm shift
in the west focused on designating landfills to *contain* and cover
society's waste. Finally, as the compact manifold, we call Earth bore for
us no more wilderness to discover, her denizens quickly realized their
need for it. Special *inside* outsides came to be designated as national
parks, an outside with an entrance fee, spaces where one pays not to
re-enter society, but to leave it.

[⛵]
https://monoskop.org/images/1/14/Foucault_Michel_Madness_and_Civilization_A_History_of_Insanity_in_the_Age_of_Reason.pdf

[♨] https://www.qmul.ac.uk/geog/research/research-projects/historiclandfill/

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

jon zingale

Re: Myth of the Given

I think that it is interesting that the lecturer introduces this position as
an extension of structuralism. Where do you stand with the earlier
assertion: "As analytic philosophers might prefer to put it, thought and
language are capable of determining things only up to isomorphism". Do you
also feel that this position is also totally bullshit?

--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Myth of the Given

In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

That's ridiculous! >8^D You can't take "as if P" seriously without taking P seriously. What you'll end up with are spies and moles, bad faith actors, pretending to argue but really just building strawmen and hiding in the corners of the conversation trying to sabotage any good faith attempts to find the truth.

On 8/21/20 8:28 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> A totally sensible position: "We can treat just about anything /_as if_/ it is text, and given the sophistication of our ability to deal with text, that should lead to some insights."
>
> A totally bullshit position that no one should ever have tolerated for a minute: "Everything is text."

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

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Eric Charles-2

Re: Myth of the Given

---You can't take "as if P" seriously without taking P seriously.---

It's not what I'm taking seriously, though, right? I don't doubt that the authors in question take textual interpretation seriously (and come from a tradition of taking textual interpretation seriously). I also don't doubt that the methods they developed in that context can provide insights in other contexts. But that doesn't make those other contexts into texts.

(See also how today's discussion about applying poker to understand political and business situations doesn't mean those situations are poker.)

[hidden email]

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:07 PM glen∉ℂ <[hidden email]> wrote:

That's ridiculous! >8^D You can't take "as if P" seriously without taking P seriously. What you'll end up with are spies and moles, bad faith actors, pretending to argue but really just building strawmen and hiding in the corners of the conversation trying to sabotage any good faith attempts to find the truth.

On 8/21/20 8:28 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> A totally sensible position: "We can treat just about anything /_as if_/ it is text, and given the sophistication of our ability to deal with text, that should lead to some insights."
>
> A totally bullshit position that no one should ever have tolerated for a minute: "Everything is text."

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

gepr

Re: Myth of the Given

Ha! Yes, that's a much more reasonable statement than saying "'everything is text' is bullshit". It's not bullshit. It may be a bit misguided. Or perhaps they're overstating the case simply to provide emphasis to their (overly dense) audience. But calling it "bullshit" doesn't help. There is such a thing as "bullshit", and this ain't it.

On 8/21/20 6:25 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> ---You can't take "as if P" seriously without taking P seriously.---
>
> It's not what I'm taking seriously, though, right? I don't doubt that the authors in question take textual interpretation seriously (and come from a tradition of taking textual interpretation seriously). I also don't doubt that the methods they developed in that context can provide insights in other contexts. But that doesn't make those other contexts into texts.

> On 8/21/20 8:28 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > A totally bullshit position that no one should ever have tolerated for a minute: "Everything is text."

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

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Eric Charles-2

Re: Myth of the Given

There is such a thing as "bullshit", and this ain't it.

Touché! Damn these double edged swords!

I clearly should have said: We can treat "everything is text" as if it is the feces of a male bovine :- )

[hidden email]

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:00 AM glen∉ℂ <[hidden email]> wrote:

Ha! Yes, that's a much more reasonable statement than saying "'everything is text' is bullshit". It's not bullshit. It may be a bit misguided. Or perhaps they're overstating the case simply to provide emphasis to their (overly dense) audience. But calling it "bullshit" doesn't help. There is such a thing as "bullshit", and this ain't it.

On 8/21/20 6:25 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> ---You can't take "as if P" seriously without taking P seriously.---
>
> It's not what I'm taking seriously, though, right? I don't doubt that the authors in question take textual interpretation seriously (and come from a tradition of taking textual interpretation seriously). I also don't doubt that the methods they developed in that context can provide insights in other contexts. But that doesn't make those other contexts into texts.

> On 8/21/20 8:28 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > A totally bullshit position that no one should ever have tolerated for a minute: "Everything is text."

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