Re: (no subject)

Posted by gepr on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/no-subject-tp7601231p7601250.html

That paper is positively pornographic! Well done.

If I understand what you're doing, which I most likely don't, the mechanized graphs are an excellent example of some rhetoric I'm currently trying to foist on some unwilling victims (re the "languages" within which we couch hypotheses, and how "language" choice sets a frame/paradigm).

But they're academics. And I am not. So I'd like to confirm that you've submitted it somewhere, regardless of your expectations of acceptance? I don't need to know where. If so, I'll feel more confident in encouraging them to read it.


On March 24, 2021 4:46:23 PM PDT, David Eric Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
>I will claim that part of the problem is a bad problem in conceptual
>delineation in much (not all!) of the community, which the terminology
>canalizes and makes it hard to escape from.  For part of that I do have
>something I think is a corrective.  I don’t know if it will ever be
>accepted anywhere, so I put it on the BioRxiv here:
>https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.09.430402v1.abstract
><https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.09.430402v1.abstract>
>
>
--
glen ⛧

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/