Friam

more Epstein fallout

Classic

List

Threaded

17 messages Options

Marcus G. Daniels

more Epstein fallout

Waiting for the other shoe to drop..

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

gepr

Re: more Epstein fallout

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

If all money is dirty, then perhaps it is a service to be reminded of that -- if nothing is fair than perturbations around fairness are at least interesting changes. The Stallman eviction was more a symbolic punishment: There was something to be mad about, and he spoke incautiously, so punish that person. This is kind of the reverse: A person that would know just what to say and what not to say, and would have keen sense of what was PC, and of risk in the abstract, but with deeds that were nonetheless unaligned to that.

On 1/11/20, 3:45 PM, "Friam on behalf of glen" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff-2

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by gepr

The queen of strategies for how non-profits can squeeze money out of those who have too much and have earned it in nefarious ways (almost always) is a woman named Lynne Twist. Lynne teaches a brutal workshop called "The Soul of Money." The big takeaway from her workshop is: "those of us advocating positive social change have a sacred duty to move that money from where it was ill-got and put it to use in rightful ways." Unfortunately for us at the Center, we don't know any uber-Capitalists.

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

Merle wrote:

"The big takeaway from her workshop is: "those of us advocating positive social change have a sacred duty to move that money from where it was ill-got and put it to use in rightful ways."

First we have to presume there is such a thing as positive social change, as opposed to change motivated by arbitrary preferences and promoted by organizations that happen not to be taxed.

Why is it important that a researcher or some agent for whatever kind of change get access to Epstein's assets? Shouldn't claimants have the first cut? If illegal activity led to the assets in the first place, then the government could seize that property. What consensus definition of rightful is there other than the law? I suppose given the fact the government designates some organizations as non-profit, it is pretty much a free-for-all of opportunity. All non-profits can claim to be on equal footing with regard to their sacred duties and rightful uses of the money.

Is there really a significant distinction between a for-profit and a non-profit and the use of money from culturally-alien sources? It's all compensated by tax policy. Why shouldn't start-ups take money from the Saudi public investment fund? Their treatment of women and gay people is horrific. A company that completely relies on that funding will be motivated to look away from atrocities by that government. On the other hand, the managers of that fund may become more aware of what it takes to be visible in western economies too, and our culture will bleed into theirs.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Merle Lefkoff <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 5:43 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

thompnickson2

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by Merle Lefkoff-2

Wow! Gives new meaning to the notion of “money laundering”.

Hard to have an opinion, here. Hard to think of any institution not funded by ill-gotten gains. Still, one hates to grant nasty people the offramp of philanthropy. “He was a rapist but I gave to MIT”? “He Hated Women But He Loved Man”?

There is a lot of evidence that people are nasty just to the extent they are wealthy. The wealthier one is the more one is likely to see wealth disparities as deserved, rather than accidental. Add to that the fact that it often takes a certain amount of nastiness to become wealthy, and it’s hard not to imagine that billionaires are not a pretty nasty lot. I am not referring, of course, to all the many billionaires on this list.

But it also follows that anybody who is wealthier than anybody else is nastier than they are.

We all have a lot to explain.

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 Merle Lefkoff
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 5:43 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

Steve Smith

Re: more Epstein fallout

A good friend makes the distinction:

"Power does not corrupt, Power IS Corruption!"

Money is a highly liquid (or even volatile?) form of power. The issues many/most raise around cryptocurrency (untraceable transfer of wealth) seems to revolve around the extreme case that "you can buy anything" and another extreme case of human nature (if any thing is possible, that thing will almost surely be pursued by someone).

This all might sound trite or even "dead wrong" on first blush, but I've been living with that statement for nearly 20 years and it fits yet better as it (or I?) age(s).

Any system (game) can be gamed, so whether it is formal "social purpose" or "non-profit" or even "best intentions", there will be gamers of that game.

Epstein is just one of many (but highly public at this point) individuals who managed not only to "game" a number of systems effectively but seemed even to be adept at building "scaffolding" among the different systems... playing on his own distorted sense of women, youth, sexuality, he was able to draw others into situations where he could siphon of some of their power via money (possibly) or political power (highly likely) or social influence (clearly) while indulging in his own ego-trip of having some significant play in "the game of Science".

I think we should all be at least cautioned if not embarrassed by whatever seduces (or intimidates) us... those who Epstein got to via financial/scientific flattery are perhaps the least of the ones who became "pawns" in his game.

When I left LANL, I was set on "making it" at least as well (financially and professionally and personally) as I did whilst "institutionalized" there. I discovered VERY quickly (why is hindsight so good sometimes?) that if I wanted to make (a lot of) money I had to work for people with (a lot of) money. Odd thing was that the places there was (a lot of) money were the places I was either fleeing by leaving LANL (e.g. nuclear weapons, intelligence work) or things I had been (mostly) shielded from whilst institutionalized (e.g. big Entertainment, big Pharma/Med, big Fossil Fuels). More than anything I recognized how much my institution had buffered me from those facts... and the fact of most of the work being funneled through the Gub'mint adds an extra level of indirection/leverage/abstraction. I've done "OK", but mostly by trading improvements in my professional and personal life for financial advantage and the aforementioned "buffering" (innocence?).

The main thing I can echo from Marcus' rant here is that I think it is a "good thing" for you Merle, that you don't have any UberCapitalists in your circle...

Emergence involves collective action without central control... money (power) facilitates centralization and control... that kind of success can lead to it's own failure.

My $bc.02

- Steve

On 1/12/20 10:14 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

Wow! Gives new meaning to the notion of “money laundering”.

Hard to have an opinion, here. Hard to think of any institution not funded by ill-gotten gains. Still, one hates to grant nasty people the offramp of philanthropy. “He was a rapist but I gave to MIT”? “He Hated Women But He Loved Man”?

There is a lot of evidence that people are nasty just to the extent they are wealthy. The wealthier one is the more one is likely to see wealth disparities as deserved, rather than accidental. Add to that the fact that it often takes a certain amount of nastiness to become wealthy, and it’s hard not to imagine that billionaires are not a pretty nasty lot. I am not referring, of course, to all the many billionaires on this list.

But it also follows that anybody who is wealthier than anybody else is nastier than they are.

We all have a lot to explain.

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 Merle Lefkoff
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 5:43 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

The queen of strategies for how non-profits can squeeze money out of those who have too much and have earned it in nefarious ways (almost always) is a woman named Lynne Twist. Lynne teaches a brutal workshop called "The Soul of Money." The big takeaway from her workshop is: "those of us advocating positive social change have a sacred duty to move that money from where it was ill-got and put it to use in rightful ways." Unfortunately for us at the Center, we don't know any uber-Capitalists.

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

--

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Let’s consider a scenario a little closer to home. Consider a vegan and a person passionate about animal rights. Such a person is confronted all the time with individuals who do not share their values. A television program that comes to mind is America’s Test Kitchen. This program often features the carcass of an animal treated in various ways to make it delicious. The cooks stand around the carcass and chat about the benefits of their treatment strategy. The program is really about one form of hedonism. Another form of hedonism is the Epstein kind. Instead of an animal carcass, the dialog was probably about the merits of underage females, and the distinct properties of their body development, and (to them) amusing ways to exploit their naivete. The kind of thinking is not that different, but the conditions of exploitation are different. It seems pretty plausible to me that when one has a hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal, that kind of distinction becomes more and more abstract. People eat animals because they can. Billionaires can do more things, and so they do.

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Date: Sunday, January 12, 2020 at 9:14 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Wow! Gives new meaning to the notion of “money laundering”.

But it also follows that anybody who is wealthier than anybody else is nastier than they are.

We all have a lot to explain.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

thompnickson2

Re: more Epstein fallout

Wait a minute, Marcus, the syllogism

A can do X (has the potentiality, possibility, opportunity, etc.)

Ergo, A does X

Is missing a crucial premise

Why does the potentiality entail the desire?

I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.

Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:01 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Wow! Gives new meaning to the notion of “money laundering”.

But it also follows that anybody who is wealthier than anybody else is nastier than they are.

We all have a lot to explain.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 4:45 PM glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

At the risk of offense, I'm not sure how I feel about Lloyd being put on admin leave. The old trope about 'dirty money' has always rang hollow for me. All money is always dirty. It reminds me of this guy:

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/04/portland_man_accused_of_druggi.html

I can't find it now. But he supposedly open sourced his patents and was a member of the dorkbot community. At what point do we forget the origins of some funding? I mean, Bill Gates' money was aggregated via some filthy monopolistic methods. Does that imply nonprofits should turn down their help?

On January 11, 2020 12:35:59 PM PST, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Waiting for the other shoe to drop..
>
>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mit-review-cites-big-mistakes-taking-epstein-donations-n1113911

--
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?

I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.

Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.

Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

Marcus

thompnickson2

Re: more Epstein fallout

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?

I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.

Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.

Marcus

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: more Epstein fallout

Did you put the dewinged Greenhead out of its misery?

-----------------------------------
Frank Wimberly

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 2:53 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?
I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.
Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.
Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Nick writes:

"But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?"

I claim it is subjective. A foodie with "developed tastes" has strong opinions on what is good and bad. They may even begin to believe that these good and bad things are more than subjective and that they matter in some universal or culturally-foundational way. Whereas to me, food is fuel and their activity is one of many possible hobbies.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:53 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

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

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?

I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.

Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.

Marcus

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: more Epstein fallout

Also, with regard to Epstein, I don’t know why you presume emotional modeling of the young women. That would motivate a sadism motive. Pure objectification also seems plausible.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 12, 2020, at 2:04 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick writes:

"But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?"

I claim it is subjective. A foodie with "developed tastes" has strong opinions on what is good and bad. They may even begin to believe that these good and bad things are more than subjective and that they matter in some universal or culturally-foundational way. Whereas to me, food is fuel and their activity is one of many possible hobbies.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:53 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?

I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.

Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.

Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

thompnickson2

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by Frank Wimberly-2

I don’t remember. Perhaps the most horrifying part of the experience was that the fly didn’t seem miserable. It just went it’s busy-ness without wings.

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: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:56 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Did you put the dewinged Greenhead out of its misery?

-----------------------------------
Frank Wimberly

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 2:53 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?
I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.
Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.
Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: more Epstein fallout

He probably thought he was flying.

-----------------------------------
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 3:35 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don’t remember. Perhaps the most horrifying part of the experience was that the fly didn’t seem miserable. It just went it’s busy-ness without wings.

n

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: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:56 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Did you put the dewinged Greenhead out of its misery?
-----------------------------------
Frank Wimberly

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sun, Jan 12, 2020, 2:53 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:
So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?
I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.
Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.
Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Prof David West

Re: more Epstein fallout

In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels

Epstein embezzled his wealth and then parlayed those stolen funds into even greater wealth. His predilections existed before he was wealthy.

Wealth removed something - consequences from behaving - rather than adding something - new behavior.

Nick might very well plunge a fork into his hand if there were no consequences for doing so. But what kind/form of 'wealth" would allow the avoidance of consequences that the rest of us might incur from such an action?

Wealth, individual and aggregate, shields people from the consequences of climate change.

Even as poor as I am, I have sufficient wealth to pay the air conditioning bill, the Iceland Air transatlantic jet ticket home, etc. The truly wealthy - and your senators and congress critters - will suffer no consequences right up to the point that our species goes extinct.

Something other than fear of consequences is required to motivate actions "for the good." Epstein needed some kind of humanism/morality — climate activists need some kind of empathy for those who will suffer consequences, including animals and the ecosystem as a whole.

davew

On Sun, Jan 12, 2020, at 11:33 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

Also, with regard to Epstein, I don’t know why you presume emotional modeling of the young women. That would motivate a sadism motive. Pure objectification also seems plausible.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 12, 2020, at 2:04 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick writes:

"But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?"

I claim it is subjective. A foodie with "developed tastes" has strong opinions on what is good and bad. They may even begin to believe that these good and bad things are more than subjective and that they matter in some universal or culturally-foundational way. Whereas to me, food is fuel and their activity is one of many possible hobbies.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 2:53 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

So, the logic seems right.

But … just to take the Epstein case … doesn’t that presume that abusing women feels good?

I just have never see how that works,

In the marshland around where grew up, there were these enormous flies, with beaklike mouthparts for biting…Greenheads, they were called. They used to come into our barn at night, and then congregate on the inside of the windows during the day, frantic to get out. I once caught one and took its wings off to see what would happen. I never did it again. It didn’t feel good.

So, either having great power over people changes the nature of what feels good, OR, there are some people for whom making others feel bad makes them feel good. I would say that these latter folks need to be quarantined. And if keeping people from becoming wealthy is prophylactic, I say tax the daylights out of the rich.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more Epstein fallout

Nick writes:

“Why does the potentiality entail the desire?
I can plunge a dinner fork into the back of my hand, right now.
Surely, you don’t expect me to do so, just because I can.”

The premise is that people do things that feel good, and things that are apparently free from negative consequences.
Neither would be true with this use of a dinner fork. It might feel good to plunge the dinner fork into the hand of an impolite dinner guest. Whether that would be free of consequences would depend on the relative quality of your respective lawyers and the physical strength of your guest.

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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove