Login  Register

Re: Philosophy, Mathematics, and Science

Posted by Nick Thompson on Jul 12, 2009; 7:54pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Analytic-philosophy-Wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia-tp3235494p3247022.html

Owen,

Is the program we built together.... MOTH .....  a thing?

That's funny, because I have always thought of programs as extremely
refined arguments.  Programs and simulations show the entailments of an
argument with a precision that no [other form of] philosophical argument
could hope for.  

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([hidden email])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/




> [Original Message]
> From: Owen Densmore <[hidden email]>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
> Date: 7/12/2009 1:13:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Philosophy, Mathematics, and Science
>
> On Jul 12, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Jack K. Horner wrote:
> > ...That granted, if we are faced, as has been asserted, with a  
> > choice of either philosophizing or "building things",  here are some  
> > challenges:
> >
> >        1.  What are "things"?
>
> Something that lasts.  Ideas are fine.  What is the philosophic  
> equivalent of a Ring?
>
> >        2.  Which "things" should we build and why?
>
> Anything that lasts.  So that it can be built upon.
>
> >        3.  Is knowledge/ABM/science possible without making
> >           at least some presumptions (even if they are only
> >           conventions) about meaning, logic, and perception?
>
> Yes.
>
> > ...
> > Bottom line: we can choose to ignore "philosophy", but we can't make  
> > it go away.
>
> Yes we can: we can ask that community to start a separate mail list.  
> It clearly is both popular and important.  But not to the original  
> intent of Friam, which was to create a community of those interested  
> in SFI and applied complexity.
>
> Let me be clear: philosophy is fine, we all participate in our own  
> personal brand of it to get through life.  I none the less agree:  
> Please God No.
>
> There is nothing at all wrong in building a new list, it happens all  
> the time that successful communities do so.  If it would help, I can  
> construct it for folks needing it in case the philosophic excludes  
> network expertise.  It would be, I think, based on the Philosophy of  
> Science, right?  Its a commendable discourse.  But not for me and many  
> of the Friam list.
>
>     -- Owen
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org