|
|
Phil,
I hate it when one of my topics gets dropped, and therefore feel guilty for being one of the DROPPERS, here.
Sometimes the discussions get so far reaching and technical that I am forced to "pass over them in silence" as Wittegenstein said.
the only piece of your message that I have anything nearly competent to say about is your ....
"when modern science took an interest in complex systems it, concentrated on theory rather than on carefully documenting the physical phenomenon."
I wonder if this isnt a common occcurence in science. Think of Evolutionary Biology Darwinism has a much stronger hand on its theories than it does on the things those theories explain. Think for a moment about our realtive grasp on "natural selection" and "adaptation". Natural selection is supposed to the be "cause" of adaptation, yet we seem to understand the cause much better than we understand the effect. Ask an evolutionary biologist to define adaptation: 90 percent will use the word natural selection in their definitions, because they dont have clue what they mean by adaptation.
Thus, it doesnt surprise me that wise and sophisticated people can talk about the theory of complexity without having a clue what they mean by it.
I got a group of people to gether at Clark a few years back to start a research project on emergence in human social groups. We were NEVER able to come up with a phenomenon that everybody agreed was an instance of emergence.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060813/be24b22f/attachment.html
|
Locked
