Dave, et alii -
Our language around "Truthiness" lead me to consider the
following:
When Christiaan Huygens recognized injection locking between two
of his pendulum clocks, he referred to it as "a Strange Sympathy",
perhaps more strange because they had phase-locked 180 degrees out
or "counter synchronous"? This type of "Strange Sympathy" is
suggestive to me of the "Contrarian" nature of many of the
discussions on this list.
A "friend of FriAM" worked on the "Closer to Truth" series when
he first moved to Santa Fe. I think working use of the term
"Truth" is apt for this conversation... that one *can* approach
"Truth" but not *reach* it, and that there is not a singular
"Truth"... like "THE Truth" which is reminiscent (for me) of our
language here about "local Truth" and my preference of "contingent
Truth".
With your most recent implied examples of "improv" and "riffing" and "jamming", I am reminded of our discussion of Metaphor at Jenny's this summer. My contention is that the value of a metaphor is that it provides a target to break from. A *perfect* metaphorical mapping would be a perfect isomorphic analogy between the metaphor's source and target domain. This alone is relatively unuseful and uninteresting. WHAT makes a metaphor useful (or at least interesting)? Perhaps it is the structure provided by the elements that *do* map directly that allows the elements that don't to provide hints or gestures at "more Truth"? Of course, the very use of "Truth" in this sense implies that there is a *singular Truth*, a "Platonic Truth", even if it is not attainable in the *real* world, a Transcendent Truth if you will?
I am trying to understand if we are "converging on" the idea that *convergence* or *resonance* or *synchrony* or *phase locking* or *mode locking* is somehow a "bad thing"? Of course, such an idea is self-contradictory... "if there is *Truth*, it exists in not trying to name it"?
I suspect I will be told how I am wrong about this, but your rhetoric on this topic suggests that in fact, you DO believe in some kind of meta-Truth which is also transcendent and is "the Quality without a Name" (Christopher Alexander) or the idea of "Je ne sais Quoi" or "Wabi Sabi". It seems to have a lot in common with the idea of "the Tao"?
- Steve
Thanks. I'm quite relieved to read this, since I think it to be "true." And the term "mail in" is now part of my lexicon.
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 1:15 AM, Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:
Quite the opposite. The system at the root of my definition is optimized for 'all improv, all the time'. When that 'improv' ability is diminished by fixed, rote, performance, that is when the system fails. When you listen to a really good jazz group, or an orchestra learning a new piece (or playing it the first X number of times) everyone is doing 'improv' i.e. actively listening to each other and their instruments and making deliberative and intentional actions towards their own instrument - that is really great. But, the thousandth time the same piece is played in the same concert hall, much of that active/deliberative/intentional aspect is lost and the performers merely act by rote. They could be asleep and rely on muscle memory to produce the sounds, which, by the way, start to sound exactly like the notes on the sheet of paper, technically correct but without soul.
Actors use the term, 'mail it in' to describe performances that are done without thought. Tom Cruise is an actor oft accused of mailing it in because everything he does, regardless of film or character, is the same - it is Tom Cruise, not the character he is supposed to be portraying.
davew
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017, at 02:09 PM, Merle Lefkoff wrote:
Are you suggesting that if individuals begin to--shall we say--"improvise" that it disturbs the potential emergence of an harmonic system? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "mail in their part of the overall performance."
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:
Steve,
My definition refers to a single system - a single system and is not
intended to suggest anything about interacting systems, nor anything
external to itself. I do assume that this system is contained within a
complex system which is the source of the input signals detected by the
sensors. I similarly assume that the effectors may transmit signals to
the containing system but want to leave that aside for the moment.
I could metaphorically equate my system to a neural network brain within
the skin of a human being — but again would prefer to simply focus on my
system in a non-anthropomorphized manner; just to keep things simple and
to avoid the potential for diversions into side conversations.
I am also using neural networks - without naming things as such - again,
to avoid distractions, this makes explanations clumsier, but it serves
my purpose for the moment.
The connecting web can route any input to any output, using a near
infinite number of pathways. More importantly it can route any
combination of inputs to any combination of outputs along any of the
near INFINITE (I yell only to point out the combinatorial explosion of
pathways) number of routes (circuits).
Now imagine that this system is an organism and that the connection of
some [input | set of inputs | pattern of inputs] to [an| set of |
pattern of] outputs increases its survival potential. Further imagine
that this system is highly dynamic and acutely optimized to assure than
and and all input/s are conveyed to the most useful output/s (with
useful being simply the increase or maintenance of survival potential.
The web of input-output connects can be 'rewired' in "real time," i.e.
in whatever unit of time exists between receipt of the next inputs.
Now imagine that a/some sensors seem to receive the same input over and
over again and, due to "fatigue" they either shut down and fail to relay
the input to the web, or they lock into constantly sending the same
input value to the web without regard to whatever was actually sensed.
System fault.
Similarly, a particular pathway (set of pathways) are utilized more
often when receiving a particular pattern of inputs and those pathways
channelize, essentially become fixed. System fault because the ability
of the system to adapt is impaired. This would be particularly evident
if the pattern of inputs begins to subtly change, but change enough that
the pattern of outputs should be modified and they are not.
Whenever these faults occur, the system as a whole starts behaving as if
A (set of inputs) IS B (set of outputs). That simply use of the verb 'to
be' is my definition of "truth," and it is purely local because it is a
condition/state of the individual system.
Very quickly - imagine several such systems interacting. Your marching
band for example. For each member of the band as a single organism (of
the type discussed above) all the other members of the band are simply
part of a containing complex system. When each of the individual systems
are using their innate ability to route the 'right' inputs to the
'right' outputs the outcome can be cacophony that morphs into an
exquisite performance. But when individual systems start to fail -
establish truthiness - start to "mail in" their part of the overall
performance, the band as a whole and your enjoyment of their performance
is bound to suffer.
davew
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017, at 04:58 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> Dave sez:
> > It is certainly possible for one sensor-web-effector state machine to
> > "infect" another, i.e. stimulate a second machine to replicate the
> > behavior. If that happens we have 'convergence' which is nothing more
> > than collective 'fault'/ 'defectiveness'.
> >
> It sounds as if you believe that resonance, mode locking, phase locking,
> tidal locking, etc. are somehow defective ways for systems to
> interact. I can agree that they are modestly less interesting than
> more chaotic systems. While *I* might find a marching (esp. if they
> are goose-stepping) army aberrant (and abhorrent), I might find a
> *marching band* or *synchronized swimmers* or a dance-troupe following a
> choreography (e.g. Cirque de Soliel perfomance) somehow beautiful. And
> I would suggest these are examples of what you are judging as
> "defective"? I suppose that since only a *subsystem* of the units
> (dancers/musicians/soldiers) are mode/phase-locked for the duration of
> the march/performance, that this is only a partial example and therefore
> only *partially* defective/faulty?
>
> I believe it is in the liminal space which fills the near-locality of a
> shared "dialect" where the interesting stuff happens, not unlike in
> dynamical systems' "edge of chaos". I agree with the technical
> expression that any "statement of Truth" is a defect, but that does not
> mean that it doesn't gesture in the direction of, or roughly
> circumscribe, or provide a proxy for a more transcendent "truth". One
> *might* argue that each individual has a private, idiosyncratic dialect
> of "the same language", and that interaction amongst individuals whose
> dialects are similar enough to intend to agree/discuss/converge/??
>
> I would claim that a well formed question suggests a family of "answers"
> and thereby hints at what we want to believe in as "truth".
>
> This paper may (or may not) offer some perspective on the evolution of a
> language/dialect and teh convergence/coherence issue.
>
>
> - Steve
>
> ============================================================
> 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
--
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
Visiting Professor in Integrative Peacebuilding
Saint Paul University
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
mobile: <a href="tel:%28303%29%20859-5609" value="+13038595609" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">(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
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
--
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
Visiting Professor in Integrative PeacebuildingSaint Paul UniversityOttawa, 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
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |