random v stochastic v indeterminate
Locked
 
|
On August 13, 2017 4:39:47 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >Every day I form hypotheses about how I think this or that experiment >or code modification will go, and often I have to confront contrary >evidence. I would say I have a pretty fast turnover of ideas. I doubt that. My guess is that your ideas that you think are turning over fast have a long and deep history within you and you resurrect them sporadically and try to apply them to some current context. >If I work with other people on these things, they will agree that some >issues are settled, and other issues remain ambiguous. The language >evolves with shared experience, and in such a way that feelings become >less and less part of it. I don't think it has anything to do with >when lunchtime is. Other people it is all about lunchtime, oxytocin >and stuff like that. > > >How are social issues any different? They aren't any different. But I think your sense of fast turnover and munging of ideas is illusory. Those ideas you flip through were already there in some form and your trying them out against the (social) context. People who spend their lives building these ideas have a large rolodex to flip through, some of which other rolodex flippers will agree are or are not applicable in this or that type of context. Innovative ideas do emerge. But it's never fast. -- ⛧glen⛧ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
Glen writes:
Well, the context you provided was struggling with a phobia, or some entrenched belief.
I don't really see why it is important if innovation is occurring or not. What difference does it make if any one example is discovered on the spot, or synthesized from several tactics found in the rolodex? Contrast to a person that is not growing such
a rolodex over years or decades and is overwhelmed when they confront a different kind of situation.
I posit that the (supposed) anomie, the opioid abuse, organized racism, Trump, etc. are all just indicators of populations that have low mental plasticity due to living in a stable, unchallenged, low-opportunity environment. The kind of environment that
social conservatives create whenever given the opportunity -- like (sheesh) that it matters one iota the kind of sex one enjoys. But their problem is not a spiritual or existential crisis. Their desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't
confront, that they just don't have much to offer.
Marcus From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of gepr ⛧ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 9:35:50 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme On August 13, 2017 4:39:47 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >Every day I form hypotheses about how I think this or that experiment >or code modification will go, and often I have to confront contrary >evidence. I would say I have a pretty fast turnover of ideas. I doubt that. My guess is that your ideas that you think are turning over fast have a long and deep history within you and you resurrect them sporadically and try to apply them to some current context. >If I work with other people on these things, they will agree that some >issues are settled, and other issues remain ambiguous. The language >evolves with shared experience, and in such a way that feelings become >less and less part of it. I don't think it has anything to do with >when lunchtime is. Other people it is all about lunchtime, oxytocin >and stuff like that. > > >How are social issues any different? They aren't any different. But I think your sense of fast turnover and munging of ideas is illusory. Those ideas you flip through were already there in some form and your trying them out against the (social) context. People who spend their lives building these ideas have a large rolodex to flip through, some of which other rolodex flippers will agree are or are not applicable in this or that type of context. Innovative ideas do emerge. But it's never fast. -- ⛧glen⛧ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|||||
|
|
In reply to this post by gepr
"People who spend their lives building these ideas have a large rolodex to flip through, some of which other rolodex flippers will agree are or are not applicable in this or that type of context."
Funny you use the example of cards in a rolodex: It makes me think of memes!
I suspect neural correlates rapidly calibrate to networks with similar behavior & topology across individuals sharing a _grounded_ task, whether it is hunting a Buffalo or writing a song. But crazy ain't grounded, so distributing names for those networks
to non-crazy people doesn't survive a fitness test. Crazy terms can only be up-voted in a crazy community.
Marcus From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of gepr ⛧ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 9:35:50 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme On August 13, 2017 4:39:47 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >Every day I form hypotheses about how I think this or that experiment >or code modification will go, and often I have to confront contrary >evidence. I would say I have a pretty fast turnover of ideas. I doubt that. My guess is that your ideas that you think are turning over fast have a long and deep history within you and you resurrect them sporadically and try to apply them to some current context. >If I work with other people on these things, they will agree that some >issues are settled, and other issues remain ambiguous. The language >evolves with shared experience, and in such a way that feelings become >less and less part of it. I don't think it has anything to do with >when lunchtime is. Other people it is all about lunchtime, oxytocin >and stuff like that. > > >How are social issues any different? They aren't any different. But I think your sense of fast turnover and munging of ideas is illusory. Those ideas you flip through were already there in some form and your trying them out against the (social) context. People who spend their lives building these ideas have a large rolodex to flip through, some of which other rolodex flippers will agree are or are not applicable in this or that type of context. Innovative ideas do emerge. But it's never fast. -- ⛧glen⛧ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
On August 13, 2017 11:38:07 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >I suspect neural correlates rapidly calibrate to networks with similar >behavior & topology across individuals sharing a _grounded_ task, >whether it is hunting a Buffalo or writing a song. But crazy ain't >grounded, so distributing names for those networks to non-crazy people >doesn't survive a fitness test. Crazy terms can only be up-voted in a >crazy community. I agree that the payload/content is obviously unhinged when viewed by a community with methods for regular grounding. But the crazy of Trumpians and the crazy of nazis do have a common ground: fear and doom. Such expression of doom, of the world going to hell, evokes that urgic fear in those around us that also have it, even if for other reasons (e.g. nuclear war or Satan's beast). That's what's syncing up, the underlying physiological and neurological patterns. On August 13, 2017 11:02:21 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >Well, the context you provided was struggling with a phobia, or some >entrenched belief. Yes. And I claim all thought is like that ... ie tightly coupled with the body, regardless of the scope or speed of the signaling mechanism. Obviously, fast signals (juxtacrine, synaptic and axonal) will play a different role from slow signals (hormonal). But both are at play in the construction and evolution of thoughts/ideas. >I don't really see why it is important if innovation is occurring or >not. What difference does it make if any one example is discovered on >the spot, or synthesized from several tactics found in the rolodex? >Contrast to a person that is not growing such a rolodex over years or >decades and is overwhelmed when they confront a different kind of >situation. We are all growing new structures constantly in response to the patterns impinging on us. Including novelty is important to my alternative to memetics, where one might be tempted to suggest (extrapolated from Monod-via-Grant or Wagner-via-Jenny) that new ideas come from point mutations on memes, which would be ridiculous. Any one person's rolodex of previously kneaded ideas will have a bias that reflects their subculture. The difference is that one model fits better than the other (memes), which is the topic of the larger conversation ... namely the weakness of the analogies between models of evolution to referents like thought or biology. >I posit that the (supposed) anomie, the opioid abuse, organized racism, >Trump, etc. are all just indicators of populations that have low mental >plasticity due to living in a stable, unchallenged, low-opportunity >environment. I agree completely. But it's important to see how memes provide a weak explanation of this, but reinforcement learning explains it pretty well. > But their problem is not a spiritual or existential crisis. Their > desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't > confront, that they just don't have much to offer. I disagree with the last part. They feel they have a lot to offer if the elites would only listen. This lack of listening they feel is because they don't experience the neural-construct-evoking engagement they get when they hook up with others who have those same structures. Somehow, Al Gore's expressions of fear just don't evoke their fear and vice versa. But Trump's expressions of fear do "resonate" with them, for whatever reason. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
"We are all growing new structures constantly in response to the patterns impinging on us. Including novelty is important to my alternative to memetics, where one might be tempted to suggest (extrapolated from Monod-via-Grant or Wagner-via-Jenny) that new ideas come from point mutations on memes, which would be ridiculous. Any one person's rolodex of previously kneaded ideas will have a bias that reflects their subculture."
If memory has a holographic property -- that there are many correlated memories with each memory -- then one could imagine that operators against this compressed representation could change dramatically just with
a point mutation. A smell that triggers memory of a childhood event, a conflict with a lover, etc. The experience of seeing many things in a new light when a crucial fact arrives, etc. Now assuming this is not controversial, it is still not clear to
what extent if this can be anything more than subjective. But, at least in principle there could be concepts shared by many parties that would display these characteristics, and would similarly evolve in important ways just from point mutations. The concepts
or language connected to the concepts could impose many constraints on how frequently certain point mutations would get visited, e.g. the language could just prohibit them as nonsense.
Marcus From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of gepr ⛧ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 9:18:36 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme On August 13, 2017 11:38:07 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >I suspect neural correlates rapidly calibrate to networks with similar >behavior & topology across individuals sharing a _grounded_ task, >whether it is hunting a Buffalo or writing a song. But crazy ain't >grounded, so distributing names for those networks to non-crazy people >doesn't survive a fitness test. Crazy terms can only be up-voted in a >crazy community. I agree that the payload/content is obviously unhinged when viewed by a community with methods for regular grounding. But the crazy of Trumpians and the crazy of nazis do have a common ground: fear and doom. Such expression of doom, of the world going to hell, evokes that urgic fear in those around us that also have it, even if for other reasons (e.g. nuclear war or Satan's beast). That's what's syncing up, the underlying physiological and neurological patterns. On August 13, 2017 11:02:21 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: > >Well, the context you provided was struggling with a phobia, or some >entrenched belief. Yes. And I claim all thought is like that ... ie tightly coupled with the body, regardless of the scope or speed of the signaling mechanism. Obviously, fast signals (juxtacrine, synaptic and axonal) will play a different role from slow signals (hormonal). But both are at play in the construction and evolution of thoughts/ideas. >I don't really see why it is important if innovation is occurring or >not. What difference does it make if any one example is discovered on >the spot, or synthesized from several tactics found in the rolodex? >Contrast to a person that is not growing such a rolodex over years or >decades and is overwhelmed when they confront a different kind of >situation. We are all growing new structures constantly in response to the patterns impinging on us. Including novelty is important to my alternative to memetics, where one might be tempted to suggest (extrapolated from Monod-via-Grant or Wagner-via-Jenny) that new ideas come from point mutations on memes, which would be ridiculous. Any one person's rolodex of previously kneaded ideas will have a bias that reflects their subculture. The difference is that one model fits better than the other (memes), which is the topic of the larger conversation ... namely the weakness of the analogies between models of evolution to referents like thought or biology. >I posit that the (supposed) anomie, the opioid abuse, organized racism, >Trump, etc. are all just indicators of populations that have low mental >plasticity due to living in a stable, unchallenged, low-opportunity >environment. I agree completely. But it's important to see how memes provide a weak explanation of this, but reinforcement learning explains it pretty well. > But their problem is not a spiritual or existential crisis. Their > desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't > confront, that they just don't have much to offer. I disagree with the last part. They feel they have a lot to offer if the elites would only listen. This lack of listening they feel is because they don't experience the neural-construct-evoking engagement they get when they hook up with others who have those same structures. Somehow, Al Gore's expressions of fear just don't evoke their fear and vice versa. But Trump's expressions of fear do "resonate" with them, for whatever reason. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
> Their desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't confront, that they just don't have much to offer. > > Marcus Reading this, I feel like you could found a new generation of something that is like existentialist philosophy but equally-well political theory. It is not so far from Nietzche’s notion that “God is dead” creates a problem for people, and they will face a fork in the road in how they try to deal with it. Maybe even, considering the currents running through European and particularly German society at the time he was writing (and that he specifically wrote about), driven by concerns based on similar observations. It strikes me that this is an available point of view for almost any person. Granted, the distribution of rewards and frustrations differs from person to person and also from region to region, and that matters. But the black box (black hole?) of how minds form characters and orientations in response to streams of these things draws from an immense and to me-obscure range of inputs. Makes me wonder, Eric ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
Eric writes:
< It is not so far from Nietzche’s notion that “God is dead” creates a problem for people, and they will face a fork in the road in how they try to deal with it. >
Yeah, it is probably nothing new that is happening nor a new interpretation. Institutions of various kinds can give individuals a role to play and guidelines for conduct, but a highly interconnected population
with a complex economy will stress these institutions and reveal their limitations. Meanwhile, only exceptional and delusional individuals can really make a convincing case (esp. to themselves) about their unique value either coupled-to or uncoupled-from
from institutions. However, I fear the stakes are pretty high now -- the contagion of people going bonkers could be fast with social media. A healthy society is one where individuals can mature to the point they can begin to doubt the meaning in their
own anxiety (whether by themselves, with their shrink or their spiritual authority) and make it to the next day.
Marcus From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Eric Smith <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 6:56:23 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme > Their desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't confront, that they just don't have much to offer. > > Marcus Reading this, I feel like you could found a new generation of something that is like existentialist philosophy but equally-well political theory. It is not so far from Nietzche’s notion that “God is dead” creates a problem for people, and they will face a fork in the road in how they try to deal with it. Maybe even, considering the currents running through European and particularly German society at the time he was writing (and that he specifically wrote about), driven by concerns based on similar observations. It strikes me that this is an available point of view for almost any person. Granted, the distribution of rewards and frustrations differs from person to person and also from region to region, and that matters. But the black box (black hole?) of how minds form characters and orientations in response to streams of these things draws from an immense and to me-obscure range of inputs. Makes me wonder, Eric ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
Nietzsche's complaining/rejoicing re: the loss of the Christian rule set isn't all that relevant, I don't think. Those Trumpians complaining about "political correctness" aren't complaining about the lack of a rule set, because there exists a new rule set. E.g. don't chant "Jews will not replace us" and expect to get away with it. Similarly, we can't really apply Nietzsche's observation that deontology is faulty to authoritarians anywhere. No, the desperation and rage Marcus points to is about a perceived change to the rules, from one broken rule set to another (equally broken) rule set. That's what makes it tricky for those of us who don't base our ethics on rules. When a Trumpian points out flaws in the lefty's rule set, we consequentialists have to agree with them... yeah, their rule set is faulty. They hear that part. But then the Trumpian fails to hear the qualifier: "Because ALL rule sets are faulty! Damnit." On 08/16/2017 08:10 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Yeah, it is probably nothing new that is happening nor a new interpretation. Institutions of various kinds can give individuals a role to play and guidelines for conduct, but a highly interconnected population with a complex economy will stress these institutions and reveal their limitations. Meanwhile, only exceptional and delusional individuals can really make a convincing case (esp. to themselves) about their unique value either coupled-to or uncoupled-from from institutions. However, I fear the stakes are pretty high now -- the contagion of people going bonkers could be fast with social media. A healthy society is one where individuals can mature to the point they can begin to doubt the meaning in their own anxiety (whether by themselves, with their shrink or their spiritual authority) and make it to the next day. > > Marcus > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 16, 2017 6:56:23 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme > > Reading this, I feel like you could found a new generation of something that is like existentialist philosophy but equally-well political theory. > > It is not so far from Nietzche’s notion that “God is dead” creates a problem for people, and they will face a fork in the road in how they try to deal with it. Maybe even, considering the currents running through European and particularly German society at the time he was writing (and that he specifically wrote about), driven by concerns based on similar observations. > > It strikes me that this is an available point of view for almost any person. Granted, the distribution of rewards and frustrations differs from person to person and also from region to region, and that matters. But the black box (black hole?) of how minds form characters and orientations in response to streams of these things draws from an immense and to me-obscure range of inputs. > > Makes me wonder, > > Eric -- gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
Marcus/Eric -
Great observations, both. I think this cuts to (part of) the heart of the matter.
I just recently watched "Glass Castle" (current run at Violet
Crown) with Woody Harrelson playing the role of a fairly
intelligent (his daughter, the memoirist characterizes him as
brilliant) but highly dysfunctional father of 4 who himself has
(mostly/almost) escaped the small Appalachian coal-mining town he
was raised in by an acutely abusive mother and an
apathetic/dysfunctional father and greater community. The family
lives a vagabond life with Harrelson's character (Rex) leading
them on an alternatingly merry and curiosity-driven chase through
skipping out on bill collectors and trying to find the "next big
opportunity" and "escape the forces out to repress us!". It is
(IMO) a great story of a nearly effective attempt (by the parents)
to escape/transcend their own dysfunctional roots and the mostly
effective experience of the children escaping their own (passed
down a generation) from that half-functional platform.
I also picked up (at a "tiny library" in a neighborhood) a copy
JD Vance's "Hillbilly Legacy", a memoir written by a 31 year old
Harvard educated lawyer, now living happily (and presumably
functionally) in San Francisco with his wife and child(ren?), but
still quite attached emotionally/romantically to his own roots in
Appalachia (a small KY coal mining town) and the Rustbelt
(Middletown OH, aka MiddleTucky) where all of his family and most
of his childhood friends still live and vote for and continue to
support Trump.
The common thread is the abject hopelessness that surrounded the people locked into those environments by circumstance, including lack of perspective to "just leave". Vance credits his Grandparents who raised him most of his life for having had enough perspective to shield him from the worst of that and to encourage/help him "just leave". His chronicle (I also listened to an NPR book interview when it came out maybe a year ago) includes feeling that he had "done everything in his power to waste his life up until about 18 years old" and looking at his cohort and family, might use the term "but for the grace of God, there go I".
My Pollyanna (a fairly significant player in my personal Pantheon
of Personalities which helps me cope with the kinds of Cosmic
Ennui and Existential Angst that comes with trying to be a
thinking/caring person in these hyper-connected, seemingly chaotic
times) has me looking for a "bright side" of all of this. I particularly want to call out the following quote from Marcus: A healthy society is one where individuals can mature to the point they can begin to doubt the meaning in their own anxiety (whether by themselves, with their shrink or their spiritual authority) and make it to the next day.and offer a rewording (my words are underlined) or expansion: "whether with themselves, their shrink, their spiritual authority, or their community of emergently self-enlightened people" and "and make it beyond the next day and into a new era of contagious enlightened self-interest" I hope that if we can ever get through this acutely dark/inverted time that we can follow some of the example of Nelson Mandela in his perspective and leadership out of the centuries long oppression of his people that was most recently exhibited as Apartheid. Obviously that moment was only a partial antidote, as too many of the original problems linger or arise again. But I *think* it was a better solution than to the similarly genocidal/punative response many of his people were calling for when the descendents of their Colonial Overlords finally fell. I heard recently a quote from Barbara Boxer as she left the political stage after many decades: "No victory is final" This underscores why we are dealing with the rise of white-supremacy/nazi/confederate/kkk, gender oppression, and many other battles presumed to have been won. This moment (in most places) is nothing like the conditions of the antebellum South, nor the era of Nazi/Fascist power in Europe, but there are clearly strong echoes. Such things *might* be suppressed temporarily by force, but ultimately those kinds of behaviours/activities dissipate through healing and enlightenment much more than regulation/punishment/suppression. my $.02, - Steve On 8/16/17 9:10 AM, Marcus Daniels
wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by gepr
Glen - I am inclined to agree with you, but am left somewhat empty-handed with:
my instincts are with you on this, yet in some kind of Godelian
(not Gordian) knot I find myself:
Are Heuristics or Patterns also rules? Can we suppress any desire/need to have formal rules and not just discover (or never notice) that we have an implicit rule set embedded in our intuition from our genetic and cultural origins, informed at best by personal experiences? I'd like to imagine that we *can* transcend all rules (explicit/implicit, crisp/fuzzy, etc.) but am not quite sure what that would mean or why? - Steve
On 8/16/17 11:46 AM, gⅼеɳ wrote:
Nietzsche's complaining/rejoicing re: the loss of the Christian rule set isn't all that relevant, I don't think. Those Trumpians complaining about "political correctness" aren't complaining about the lack of a rule set, because there exists a new rule set. E.g. don't chant "Jews will not replace us" and expect to get away with it. Similarly, we can't really apply Nietzsche's observation that deontology is faulty to authoritarians anywhere. No, the desperation and rage Marcus points to is about a perceived change to the rules, from one broken rule set to another (equally broken) rule set. That's what makes it tricky for those of us who don't base our ethics on rules. When a Trumpian points out flaws in the lefty's rule set, we consequentialists have to agree with them... yeah, their rule set is faulty. They hear that part. But then the Trumpian fails to hear the qualifier: "Because ALL rule sets are faulty! Damnit." On 08/16/2017 08:10 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:Yeah, it is probably nothing new that is happening nor a new interpretation. Institutions of various kinds can give individuals a role to play and guidelines for conduct, but a highly interconnected population with a complex economy will stress these institutions and reveal their limitations. Meanwhile, only exceptional and delusional individuals can really make a convincing case (esp. to themselves) about their unique value either coupled-to or uncoupled-from from institutions. However, I fear the stakes are pretty high now -- the contagion of people going bonkers could be fast with social media. A healthy society is one where individuals can mature to the point they can begin to doubt the meaning in their own anxiety (whether by themselves, with their shrink or their spiritual authority) and make it to the next day. Marcus ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Sent:* Wednesday, August 16, 2017 6:56:23 AM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme Reading this, I feel like you could found a new generation of something that is like existentialist philosophy but equally-well political theory. It is not so far from Nietzche’s notion that “God is dead” creates a problem for people, and they will face a fork in the road in how they try to deal with it. Maybe even, considering the currents running through European and particularly German society at the time he was writing (and that he specifically wrote about), driven by concerns based on similar observations. It strikes me that this is an available point of view for almost any person. Granted, the distribution of rewards and frustrations differs from person to person and also from region to region, and that matters. But the black box (black hole?) of how minds form characters and orientations in response to streams of these things draws from an immense and to me-obscure range of inputs. Makes me wonder, Eric ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
Well, just because all rule sets are faulty doesn't mean some rule sets aren't better than others. (Need I repeat it? Surely not. ... All models ... yadda yadda.) And so your intuition is right, all rule sets are faulty, including the rule set of all rule sets. The lesson isn't to throw away rule sets or adopt the One Rule Set to Rule Them All and fuzzify it. The lesson is that something other than rules is needed to complement rule sets. And we already have that in our US justice system.
The rule of law is fantastic, but it has to be tempered with context-satisficing things like democracy and trial by jury, institutionalized, bureaucratic methodology for periodically falsifying the rules against the highly contingent reality. Your "like to imagine that we can transcend all rules" is just more rule-following. There is no Ultimate Reality. There is no destination. There is only journey. But some journeys are more clearly self-defeating than others. On 08/16/2017 12:58 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: > I am inclined to agree with you, but am left somewhat empty-handed with: > > "because ALL rule sets are faulty! Damnit." > > my instincts are with you on this, yet in some kind of Godelian (not Gordian) knot I find myself: > > A) questioning the "rule" you just stated. > > and > > B) finding myself conjuring (fuzzy?) rules to replace the crisp ones > I resent/resist! > > Are Heuristics or Patterns also rules? Can we suppress any desire/need to have formal rules and not just discover (or never notice) that we have an implicit rule set embedded in our intuition from our genetic and cultural origins, informed at best by personal experiences? > > I'd like to imagine that we *can* transcend all rules (explicit/implicit, crisp/fuzzy, etc.) but am not quite sure what that would mean or why? -- gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
> Well, just because all rule sets are faulty doesn't mean some rule sets aren't better than others. (Need I repeat it? Surely not. ... All models ... yadda yadda.) And so your intuition is right, all rule sets are faulty, including the rule set of all rule sets. The lesson isn't to throw away rule sets or adopt the One Rule Set to Rule Them All and fuzzify it. The lesson is that something other than rules is needed to complement rule sets. And we already have that in our US justice system. > > The rule of law is fantastic, but it has to be tempered with context-satisficing things like democracy and trial by jury, institutionalized, bureaucratic methodology for periodically falsifying the rules against the highly contingent reality. > > Your "like to imagine that we can transcend all rules" is just more rule-following. There is no Ultimate Reality. There is no destination. There is only journey. But some journeys are more clearly self-defeating than others. Got it! (he says as he grinds dumbly and trudgingly around in a circle tracking his own footprints, not realizing that he's slowly turning to butter) ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Obama's tweet about the events in Charlottesville got the most "likes" of any tweet in twitter history. It is a quote from Nelson Mandela: "No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or
his background or his religion … People must learn to hate, and if they
can learn to hate, they can be taught to love … For love comes more
naturally to the human heart than its opposite,” On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA Visiting Professor in Integrative Peacebuilding Saint Paul University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
Merle - Thanks for offering this up. My own maunderings about "what is in human nature" having me trust that we are still *mostly* the animals who gathered in groups of order Dunbar number (150?) who *mostly* loved one another and treated one another with respect and generosity (up to a myriad quirks of personality and a shared fate). On the other hand, while members of said community/group/tribe/pack/herd might extend some of that goodwill toward others they recognized as same/thePeople, they had good reason to be less generous/trusting toward others who were not so familiar, who spoke unrecognizeable languages, whose skin/hair/eye color or features were significantly different. I think these are very real evolutionarily adaptive roots of what we see as Xenophobia today. I don't describe this as a way of trying to normalize
racist/ethnic bigotry, but rather to acknowledge that it has some
instinctual roots that focus the "hateful/fearful teachings" that
become institutionalized in subcultures and perhaps entire
cultures. And it is this wholesale adoption by a group which
ends up not only teaching, but maintaining the fear (and therefore
hate?). I know your work is IN "peacebuilding". Does your model include an acceptance of these somewhat instinctual responses to "the Other" ? I was very pleased to see the speech by Heather's mother today
which I thought held a very positive message in what must be a
very tragic moment for her. - Steve On 8/16/17 4:16 PM, Merle Lefkoff
wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
FWIW:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openness_to_experience#Genes_and_physiology > Openness to experience, like the other traits in the five factor model, is believed to have a genetic component. Identical twins (who have the same DNA) show similar scores on openness to experience, even when they have been adopted into different families and raised in very different environments.[44] One genetic study with 86 subjects found Openness to experience related to the 5-HTTLPR polymorphism associated with the serotonin transporter gene.[45] > > Higher levels of openness have been linked to activity in the ascending dopaminergic system and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Openness is the only personality trait that correlates with neuropsychological tests of dorsolateral prefrontal cortical function, supporting theoretical links among openness, cognitive functioning, and IQ.[46] > > 44. Jang, K. L., Livesly, W. J., & Vemon, P. A.; Livesley; Vernon (September 1996). "Heritability of the big five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study". Journal of Personality. 64 (3): 577–592. PMID 8776880. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00522.x. > 45. Scott F. Stoltenberg, Geoffrey R. Twitchell, Gregory L. Hanna, Edwin H. Cook, Hiram E. Fitzgerald, Robert A. Zucker, Karley Y. Little; Twitchell; Hanna; Cook; Fitzgerald; Zucker; Little (March 2002). "Serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism, peripheral indexes of serotonin function, and personality measures in families with alcoholism". American Journal of Medical Genetics. 114 (2): 230–234. PMID 11857587. doi:10.1002/ajmg.10187. > 46. Colin G. DeYoung, Jordan B. Peterson and Daniel M. Higgins (2005). "Sources of openness/intellect: cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality". Journal of Personality. 73 (4): 825–858. PMID 15958136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00330.x. On 08/16/2017 04:30 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: > On the other hand, while members of said community/group/tribe/pack/herd might extend some of that goodwill toward others they recognized as same/thePeople, they had good reason to be less generous/trusting toward others who were not so familiar, who spoke unrecognizeable languages, whose skin/hair/eye color or features were significantly different. I think these are very real evolutionarily adaptive roots of what we see as Xenophobia today. -- gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Steve, I trust strongly the neuroscience that insists that our brains have not totally evolved past the point of reptilian behavior emerging from what I call the left-over parts of the brain. We seem to remain wired for kin and tribe, and perhaps our survival still depends to some extent on all the parts of our brain, old and new. We teach, however, that some form of contemplative practice holds the key to leaping over the barriers that keep us from loving one another. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA Visiting Professor in Integrative Peacebuilding Saint Paul University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
The strangest thing I saw today was this video To be honest, he likes to be offensive. No deep roots of xenophobia, he's open to all kinds of offensiveness. -- rec -- ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
https://buy.taser.com/taser-bolt/ Roger writes:
< The strangest thing I saw today was this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnXBeQwmmrc
> http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/08/what_the_alt_left_was_actually_doing_in_charlottesville.html Never thought I'd donate to a church or synagogue, but I wonder if a few of these would be tax deductible? Marcus From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Roger Critchlow <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 7:49 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme The strangest thing I saw today was this video
To be honest, he likes to be offensive. No deep roots of xenophobia, he's open to all kinds of offensiveness.
-- rec --
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Roger Critchlow-2
Yeah their's some trolls that for what ever reason just like to troll. They are still trolls though. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Roger Critchlow <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
On 08/16/2017 09:56 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/08/what_the_alt_left_was_actually_doing_in_charlottesville.html I was intrigued by this tweet: https://twitter.com/veryapetv/status/898240260550909952 Here's the full text for the 1st quote: > Sir, -- Having experienced fascism in the flesh, as a citizen of a Nazi-occupied country, a member of the resistance and a concentration camp prisoner, I am profoundly dismayed by Kevin Myers's reflections on the happenings at TCD on the occasion of the David Irving debate. > > If fascism could be defeated in debate, I assure you that it would never have happened, neither in Germany, nor in Italy, nor anywhere else. Those who recognized its threat at that time and tried to stop it were, I assume, also called "a mob". Regrettably too many "fair-minded people" didn't either try, or want to stop it, and, as I witnessed myself during the war, accommodated themselves with it when it took over. > > The anti-fascism of some of these people germinated rather late, in fact only when they realized that the Third Reich had lost the war, the Führer was becoming an embarrassment and his system of government a liability. > > People who witnessed fascism at its height are dying out, but the ideology is still there, and its apologists are working hard at a comeback. Past experience should teach us that fascism must be stopped before it takes hold again of too many minds, and becomes useful once again to some powerful interests, as it happened in the thirties, or in Chile. I am one hundred per cent behind the students and staff at TCD, and congratulate them for showing the way. -- Yours, etc., F. L. Frison, 69 Newtown Avenue, Blackrock, Co Dublin. Here's the snopes entry on the 2nd quote (supposedly from Hitler): http://www.snopes.com/adolf-hitler-smashing-the-nucleus/ And the third quote about clicktivism is just (apt) snark. But there's a big difference between "chasing them away with sticks" and "holding the line". The former is bad. The latter is good. -- gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |