Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Posted by Steve Smith on Jun 23, 2017; 6:39pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/the-role-of-metaphor-in-scientific-thought-tp7590080p7590112.html

Stephen -

For catholics, a confirmed unmarried man might be different than a confirmed bachelor .

being an unmarried man but not a Catholic, Confirmed or otherwise, I am not a bachelor, though my current lifestyle mimics many of the qualities of the canonical (but not Canonized) confirmed bachelor.   I did, however, attend Catholic Mass for over 15 years, and raised two daughters under the Catholic Catechism up to (but not quite including) their Confirmation.   I am still drawn (for reasons unknown) to women raised Catholic... perhaps I was overly influenced by Billy Joel's apprehension of Catholic Girls in "Only the Good Die Young".

<random personal anecdote>

In my specific case, the Catholic Church declared my only legal/religious marriage null and void just about the time my daughters, the issue of that (non)Marriage, were about to accept Confirmation into the Catholic Church.... somehow the Church's retroactive declaration that no Marriage had existed between their parents, now officially Bastards, gave my impressionable daughters the perfect excuse to decline Confirmation.  I do believe neither of them have attended Mass even once in the intervening 25 years.   I myself, despite not being a Confirmed Catholic did attend Mass (and listened thoughtfully) for 15 years and have in fact returned for special occasions (weddings, funerals, baptisms, confirmations).  In the spirit of hair-splitting terminology, I tend to ask those who were raised (and usually Confirmed) Catholic but no longer practicing if they are "Escaped", "Reformed", or "Recovering" Catholics.  I doubt those three terms cover the space fully, but seem to provide some pretty good sampling.   Most have used the term "Recovering" but many are taken aback by the alternatives and the nuances implied.  

</anecdote

This is why I split hairs about terminology... or maybe my hairsplitting of such terms is why I think the way I do? 

A woman once asked me "do you love me because I am beautiful or am I beautiful because you love me?"   I answered the only way possible: "Yes!"  It should also be noted that we have neither married nor divorced, and I still think she is beautiful.

- Sleeve

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> wrote:

Has anybody mentioned that there are lot of unmarried men that you usually wouldn't call bachelors?  There are widowers, priests, and nineteen year-olds, for example.  I learned the word because my father's brother was a thirty-five year old Major in the Air Force with no wife. He eventually got married and had children. Late bloomer?

Frank

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:

But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.


On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:
>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧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

============================================================
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