Hola Carlos. (I'm in Buenos Aires)
I don't want to separate theory from practice like that. And
> Coherent is good, but an epithet we usually reserve for scientific
> theories more than science per se.
>
> Michael Agar wrote:
>> Damned if I know. Clarity of an assertion about how the world
>> works with intent to revise against subsequent experience?
>>
>> Probably spent too much time in Vienna.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>>>> "Robert Holmes" <
[hidden email]> 07/12/08 5:31 PM >>>
>>>>>
>> Let me see if I've followed David's argument... science doesn't
>> need math
>> and it doesn't need to possess any predictive power and - given the
>> cultural/individual specificity of metaphors - reproducibility
>> seems kinda
>> optional. So exactly what does something need to make it science?
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Prof David West
>> <
[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> As a human being, and as an anthropologist, I can make
>>> predictions and
>>> create predictive models based on a largely non-conscious
>>> understanding
>>> of culture. Such predictions are not based on mathematics (a
>>> mathematics of culture is pragmatically impossible at the moment).
>>> Predictive models do not a science make.
>>>
>>> davew
>>>
>>>
>>> ============================================================
>>> 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>>
>>
>
> ============================================================
> 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.orgMeets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College