[FRIAM] Ants and Bees, Oh My.

Robert Cordingley robert at cirrillian.com
Tue Jul 10 15:11:10 EDT 2007


I think you are saying that societies use enculturation to apply their 
own rules as part of a self-organizing, self programming CAS.  And it 
takes a lot of (human) energy or pain to change direction, assuming the 
CAS that we are part of is actually non-deterministic.
Robert C.

John Goekler wrote:
>
> While I don't disagree with the broad assessments of the Iraq fiasco 
> presented here, I think we have to very careful about valuing 'our' 
> truth more highly than 'their' truth.
>
>  
>
> There is, after all, a universe for every physicist.
>
>  
>
> Is it not possible that 'truth' is no more than an emergent property 
> of the CAS we might call the observer?  (Or the 'reporting party' as 
> they say in the police logs.)
>
>  
>
> It can certainly be argued that 'truth' is entirely subjective.  That 
> it is dependent upon the initial conditions or context of the observer 
> (culture, education, personal experience, etc.); the rules (what the 
> CAS believes it must pay attention to and assign meaning to depending 
> on its own unique heuristics); and relationship (what other agents or 
> systems the CAS holds in high enough regard that it will allow itself 
> to assign meaning to data and rules they offer that are outside its 
> normal parameters and would otherwise be rejected).
>
>  
>
> Or as they say in the spook biz, 'Whose truth?  Which truth?'
>
>
>
> On 7/10/07, *Pamela McCorduck* <pamela at well.com 
> <mailto:pamela at well.com>> wrote:
>
>     Sorry, Phil, I misread and hence misquoted.  My mistake.
>
>      
>     I personally know no one, scientist or otherwise, who does not
>     speak out against this war.  (No, that's not true.  I am
>     acquainted with some people who feel so invested in this
>     administration and Republicanism in general that they think the
>     majority of us have simply failed to see the light, and history
>     will show, blah blah blah.  There's no arguing with such people. 
>     That's their "truth.")  As for the tales the members of the
>     administration who promulgated this war tell their mirrors, I have
>     no idea.   They got orders from God?  
>
>      
>     I'm told that after Vietnam, the junior officers who had watched
>     the senior officers lie their way through
>     light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel stuff until the last moment said to
>     each other: we will never do that; we will resign first.   Some
>     did.  Some told the truth to power and were quickly replaced
>     (Shinseki, for example).   Others understood that the president is
>     commander in chief of the armed forces under our constitution, and
>     however wrong-headed his ideas might be, it was their duty to
>     follow those orders, because that was an oath they had taken.
>
>      
>     It's never easy.
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:18 PM, phil henshaw wrote:
>
>>     I guess I think science is mostly an art of speaking accurately
>>     about those things it is possible to be accurate about.   Since
>>     it seems the fault in Iraq, is that our army is at war with an
>>     indigenous culture, because it mistakenly tried to 'clean-up' the
>>     violent objectors to our occupation as if they were stragglers in
>>     Saddam's army, and so stirred up a firestorm of hatred for us
>>     that had not been there before, people should speak plainly about
>>     it and not defer to the rules of polite conversation when
>>     perpetuates a war crime of any large or small proportion.   We
>>     should be truthful when we know the truth.   Accepting the right
>>     of anyone to have any opinion does not mean that you need to not
>>     state the facts you know yourself with their full value.
>>      
>>     You did slightly misquote me, though, my phrase "comity of
>>     political/military deceit"   you substituted 'defeat' for some
>>     reason.   Comity is the way to getting along with people, and
>>     hides a lot of what goes into the sausage of government, a glue
>>     that holds all kinds of things together. I'm not suggesting we
>>     abandon that, but for speaking plane and true where it matters,
>>     dropping the polite 'well you may be right' nod of deference for
>>     people who are clearly committing great crimes.
>>      
>>      
>>     Phil Henshaw                       ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸
>>     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>     680 Ft. Washington Ave
>>     NY NY 10040                      
>>     tel: 212-795-4844                
>>     e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com <mailto:pfh at synapse9.com>         
>>     explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/>  
>>
>>         -----Original Message-----
>>         *From:* friam-bounces at redfish.com
>>         <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>
>>         [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Pamela
>>         McCorduck
>>         *Sent:* Monday, July 09, 2007 10:05 AM
>>         *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>>         *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Ants and Bees, Oh My.
>>
>>         I must have missed where science was deferring to  the
>>         "comity of political/military defeat."  Most scientists, and
>>         for that matter, most professional military people, deplore
>>         this gap, though gap is too nice a word for blindly pursuing
>>         ideology in the face of facts.  If you follow it at all, you
>>         know that the present administration has gutted scientific
>>         committees meant to advise or make scientific policy for the
>>         government and loaded them with politically safe
>>         ignoramuses.  But you find the same pattern in many
>>         significant areas--health care, the drug problem, education,
>>         foreign policy generally.  
>>
>>          
>>         I  put it to an historian I know: when did we stop being a
>>         nation of Yankee pragmatists and start being a nation of
>>         ideologues?
>>
>>          
>>
>>         On Jul 9, 2007, at 5:03 AM, phil henshaw wrote:
>>
>>>         Well, where's the gap between knowledge and it's practical
>>>         use then?  We're using a method in Iraq designed for certain
>>>         failure (because of strategies modeled on attacking a
>>>         phantom enemy unlike the one actually interfering with our
>>>         plans)  and causing huge harm in every direction.  add the
>>>         15% of our own soldiers that come bask with serious
>>>         permanent psycological dammage.
>>>         http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/351/1/13 from New
>>>         Eng J of Med.  I was looking to see if young soldiers would
>>>         be more senstitive to mental damage from it, as i would
>>>         expect, but this article doesn't break that out.   If sci
>>>         defers to the 'comity of plotical/military deceit' , as it
>>>         would look to me is the problem, what's the point of calling
>>>         it science?
>>>          
>>>         Phil Henshaw                       ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸
>>>         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>         680 Ft. Washington Ave
>>>         NY NY 10040                      
>>>         tel: 212-795-4844                
>>>         e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com <mailto:pfh at synapse9.com>         
>>>         explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/>  
>>>
>>>             -----Original Message-----
>>>             *From:* friam-bounces at redfish.com
>>>             <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>
>>>             [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Pamela
>>>             McCorduck
>>>             *Sent:* Sunday, July 08, 2007 10:02 PM
>>>             *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>>>             *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Ants and Bees, Oh My.
>>>
>>>
>>>             On Jul 8, 2007, at 7:31 PM, phil henshaw wrote:
>>>
>>>>             Good observation, about using young mend when they are
>>>>             most maleable for making platoons and follow
>>>>             commands.    It's the opportunity for emergent
>>>>             structure, as well as in this case, people who wish to
>>>>             exploite it, that makes the difference.   I don't
>>>>             generally buy the evolutionary value laden self
>>>>             interest of genes idea for what makes systems powerful,
>>>>             but how the confluence of diverse factors and a
>>>>             catalyst actually engage a developmental process.  And
>>>>             it's often contradictions like the fact that these are
>>>>             not the men most fit for the job, but the ones dumb
>>>>             enough for the job, that raises the questions that
>>>>             reveal what's actually going on.   Older men would
>>>>             think more.  Bad for armies!
>>>
>>>              
>>>             I had no idea when I read this (a revelation to me at
>>>             the time) whether it was empirical observation all
>>>             senior officers in armies understood, or grounded  in
>>>             biology.  Both, apparently, but for centuries, empirical
>>>             observation served well enough.
>>>
>>>              
>>>             As for your next two paragraphs, Phil, I do believe many
>>>             in the military understand the situation completely--my
>>>             80-year-old cousin, who served as a member of the
>>>             British SAS in WW II, yelled at me on the phone last
>>>             night: "A field army can never fight a guerilla army." 
>>>             It's no secret.  Whether the officers who understand it
>>>             have--or once had--the power to do anything about  it I
>>>             don't know, but it seems unlikely.  Those who once
>>>             balked have been replaced.  Our military is quite
>>>             properly under the direction of civilians.  I hope it
>>>             will always be so, even when the civilians fail as
>>>             egregiously to understand things as they have failed  in
>>>             this instance.
>>>
>>>              
>>>
>>>              
>>>
>>>              
>>>
>>>              
>>>
>>>              
>>>
>>>             "One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to
>>>             attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. 
>>>             So I am told; I have not noticed it."
>>>
>>>              
>>>             Bertrand Russell
>>>
>>>
>>>         ============================================================
>>>         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 <http://www.friam.org/>
>>
>>         "One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack
>>         religion, because religion makes men virtuous.  So I am told;
>>         I have not noticed it."
>>
>>          
>>         Bertrand Russell
>>
>>
>>          
>>
>>     ============================================================
>>     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
>>     <http://www.friam.org/>
>
>     "One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack
>     religion, because religion makes men virtuous.  So I am told; I
>     have not noticed it."
>
>      
>     Bertrand Russell
>
>
>      
>
>     ============================================================
>     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
>     <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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070710/00d15b60/attachment.html 


More information about the Friam mailing list