[FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40

Sun Mar 31 13:13:44 EDT 2019

Adjacent possibles are neighborhoods in a comonad.

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:05 AM <friam-request at redfish.com> wrote:

> Send Friam mailing list submissions to
>         friam at redfish.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         friam-request at redfish.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         friam-owner at redfish.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we behave?)
>       (Merle Lefkoff)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 11:05:35 -0600
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we behave?)
> Nick, yes, we're very worried about the new "hard border" emerging between
> N. Ireland and the Republic.  Another stupid consequence of Brexit.  The
> Good Friday Agreement has always been fragile.
>
> We're having a meeting soon in Santa Fe about the adjacent possible, and
> attached is what Stu Kauffman and I wrote about the intention of the
> meeting.  I combine Western and Native science because some of our
> international Indigenous network has expressed interest in being included
> in the meeting. Steve Guerin can tell you more about the adjacent possible.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 9:24 PM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>> M
>>
>>
>>
>> Alright, then.  What IS the adjacent possible?
>>
>>
>>
>> N
>>
>>
>>
>> PS – Given your work with the Irish Peace Process, this Dog’s Brexit t
>> must be driving you nuts.  Have you heard the Donald Tusk quote about “the
>> special place in Hell that awaits those who floated Brexit without a trace
>> of a plan” .  Nothing more than that.  Just that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>>
>> Clark University
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Merle
>> Lefkoff
>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 30, 2019 1:35 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we
>> behave?)
>>
>>
>>
>> N.
>>
>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:30 PM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> M.,
>>
>>
>>
>> Is that like “nudge”?
>>
>>
>>
>> N.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>>
>> Clark University
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Merle
>> Lefkoff
>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 30, 2019 1:04 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we
>> behave?)
>>
>>
>>
>> For whatever it's worth, Nick, I'm now using this thread in the work
>> we're doing on the adjacent possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 9:29 PM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>>
>>
>> We were doing SO WELL until we got to … oh, see my “HORSEFEATHERS!”
>> below.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>>
>> Clark University
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Steven A
>> Smith
>> *Sent:* Friday, March 29, 2019 9:39 AM
>> *To:* friam at redfish.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we
>> behave?)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/19 1:20 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>>
>> Steve, ‘n all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just to be cranky, I want to remind everybody that ALL language use,
>> except perhaps tautological expressions, is metaphorical.
>>
>> I ascribe to this idea as well, following Lakoff and Johnson in their
>> 1980 _Metaphors we Live by_ .
>>
>>   So then, the question is not, “Is this a metaphor”, but what kind of a
>> metaphor is it and is it pernicious.
>>
>> I believe that ultimately conceptual metaphor is no more nor less than
>> the intuitive application of a model, and as is often mentioned "all models
>> are wrong, some are useful".    You use the term pernicious which suggests
>> *harmful*, I presume either intentionally so or more from sloppiness or
>> ignorance.
>>
>> My own view is that in any “tense” conversation – one in which the
>> parties feel the words really matter – it behooves a metaphor-user to
>> define the limits of the metaphor.
>>
>> I agree that "tense" conversations are different than "casual" ones if
>> that is your distinction.  Unfortunately, outside of Science/Engineering
>> contexts, I find that "tense" conversations are at their root political or
>> at least rhetorical.   One or both sides are really *serious* about being
>> believed.   If not believed in fact ("I believe what you just said") then
>> in principle ("I believe that you believe what you just said").
>>
>> I think that political/rhetorical dialog would *benefit*  by careful
>> disclosure of all metaphors being used, but one mode of such dialog is for
>> one or both sides to attempt to interject equivocal meanings... to use a
>> term (or in this case set of terms belonging to a metaphorical domain) to
>> weave an *apparently* logical argument, which is only superficially logical
>> but falls apart when the "correct" meaning of the term(s) are applied.
>>
>> So, for instance, much mischief has arisen in evolutionary biology from a
>> failure of theorists to define the limits of their use of such metaphors as
>> “natural selection” and “ adaptation”.  When limits are defined, the
>> surplus meaning of a metaphor is separated into two parts, initially, that
>> which the metaphor-user embraces and that which s/he disclaims.  The
>> embraced part goes on to become the positive heuristic of the metaphor, the
>> “wet edge” along which science develops.
>>
>> From this line of discussion, I take you to be on the branch of the
>> fault-tree I implied above as a Scientific dialog where *both* sides of the
>> discussion are honestly trying to come to mutual understanding and perhaps
>> advance understanding by combining differing perspectives on the same
>> phenomena.
>>
>> The disclaimed part, must be further divided into that which was
>> legitimately [logically] disclaimed and that which was disclaimed
>> fraudulently.  For instance, when sociobiologists use the notion of selfish
>> gene, they may legitimately disclaim the idea that genes consciously choose
>> between self-regarding and other-regarding options, but they cannot
>> legitimately disclaim the idea that a gene has the power to make any choice
>> but the self-regarding one.
>>
>> When Dawkins coined "Selfish Gene",  I felt that the *value* of the
>> metaphor invoked was in the challenge it presents:
>>
>>   And that idea is patently false.  Genes do not make choices
>>
>> Patently Genes do not make choices in the sense that we usually mean
>> "make choices", yet the strong implication is that the phenomena functions
>> *as if* they do, in "all other ways".   There may be (useful) hairsplitting
>> between "all other ways" and "many other ways" which is an important aspect
>> of analogical thinking.
>>
>> , they ARE choices and the choice is made at the level of the phenotype
>> or at the level of the population, depending on how one thinks about the
>> matter.  So the metaphor ‘selfish gene’ is pernicious in evolutionary
>> biology, because it creates confusion on the very point that it purports to
>> clarify – the level at which differential replication operates to generate
>> long term phenotypic change in a population.
>>
>> I would challenge this as I think my verbage above outlines.   I do not
>> believe that the metaphor *purports* to clarify what you say it does.
>>
>> *[NST==>* *HORSEFEATHERS!** One or two generations of sociobiologists
>> were directed away from group level explanations by this pernicious
>> metaphor.  <==nst] *
>>
>> It *strives* to provide a cognitive shortcut and to establish a fairly
>> strong metaphor which deserves careful dissection to understand the
>> particulars of the *target domain*.   An important question in the target
>> domain becomes "why does the shortcut of thinking of genes as selfish
>> actually have some level of accuracy as a description of the phenomena when
>> in fact the mechanisms involved do not support that directly?"
>>
>> *[NST==>I don’t think it does.  I think it’s a subtle and largely
>> successful attempt to import Spenserian ideology in to evolutionary
>> biology.  <==nst] *
>>
>> For all I know, EB has entirely debunked the concept and there is NO
>> utility in the idea of a "selfish gene"...
>>
>> Bruce Sherwood likes to make the point that the analogy of hydraulic
>> systems for DC circuits is misleading.   I forget the specifics of where he
>> shows that the analogy breaks down, but it is well below (or above?) the
>> level of "normal" DC circuit understanding and manipulation.   For the
>> kinds of problems I work with using DC circuits, a "battery" is a "tank of
>> water at some height", the Voltage out of the battery is the water
>> Pressure, the amount of Current is the Volume of water, a Diode is a
>> one-way valve,  a resistor is any hydraulic element which conserves water
>> but reduces pressure through what is nominally friction, etc.    As you
>> point out, there is plenty of "excess meaning" around hydraulics as source
>> domain, and "insufficient meaning" around DC circuits as target domain, and
>> if one is to use the analogy effectively one must either understand those
>> over/under mappings, or be operating within only the smaller apt-portion of
>> the domains.   For example, I don't know what the equivalent of an
>> anti-hammer stub (probably a little like a capacitor in parallel?) is but
>> that is no longer describing a simple DC circuit.
>>
>> *[NST==>I think I am back to heartily agreeing. <==nst] *
>>
>> A farmer buying his first tractor may try to understand it using the
>> source domain of "draft animal" and can't go particularly wrong by doing
>> things like "giving it a rest off and on to let it cool down", "planning to
>> feed it well before expecting it to work", "putting it away, out of the
>> elements when not in use", etc.  your "excess meaning" would seem to be
>> things like the farmer going out and trying to top off the fuel every day
>> even when he was not using the tractor, or maybe taking it out for a spin
>> every day to keep it exercised and accustomed to being driven.   The farmer
>> *might* understand "changing the oil" and "cleaning the plugs" and
>> "adjusting the points" vaguely like "deworming" and "cleaning the hooves"
>> but the analogy is pretty wide of the mark beyond the simple idea that
>> "things need attending to".
>>
>> *[NST==>OoooooH.  I like the above!  May I plaigiarise it some day?  Do
>> you by any chance know Epamanondas from your childhood.  Very politically
>> incorrect, now, I fear, but endlessly instructive on the perils of over
>> using metaphors.  <==nst] *
>>
>>
>>
>> PS – Is anybody on this list (among the handful that have gotten this far
>> in this post) familiar with the work of Douglas Walton?
>>
>> I just took a look and his work does sound interesting (and relevant).
>>
>> He seems perhaps to have written a lot about misunderstandings in AI
>> systems … i.e., how does Siri know what we mean?
>>
>> By AI, it seems you mean (the subset of) Natural Language Understanding?
>>
>> I am also reminded by reading the Wikipedia article on his work that I
>> haven't responded to Glen's question about the "theorem dependency project".
>>
>> I came to this work through my interest in abduction, which may be
>> described as the process by which we identify (ascribe meaning to?)
>> experiences.  Walton seems to suggest that you-guys are way ahead of the
>> rest of us on the process of meaning ascription, and we all should go to
>> school with you.  Please tell me where and when you offer the class.
>>
>> I assume the "you-guys" referred to here are the hard core CS/Modeling
>> folks (e.g. Glen, Marcus, Dave, ...).  I do think that the challenges of
>> "explaining things to a machine" do require some rigor, as does formal
>> mathematics and systems like the aforementioned "theorem dependency
>> project".
>>
>> - Steve
>>
>> PS.  It has been noted that my long-winded explanation of my (poorly
>> adhered to) typographical conventions for around "reserved terms" and the
>> like was perhaps defensive.  I didn't mean to sound defensive, I just
>> wanted to be more precise and complete to (possibly) reduce
>> misunderstandings.   I don't imagine many read the entireity of my
>> missives, but as often as not,  when people do read and respond, I sense
>> that some of my conventions are not recognized.
>>
>> ============================================================
>> 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
>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>
>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>
>> merlelefkoff at gmail.com <merlelefoff at gmail.com>
>> mobile:  (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
>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>
>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>
>> merlelefkoff at gmail.com <merlelefoff at gmail.com>
>> mobile:  (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
>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
>
>
> --
> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
> emergentdiplomacy.org
> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
> merlelefkoff at gmail.com <merlelefoff at gmail.com>
> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
> _______________________________________________
> Friam mailing list
> Friam at redfish.com
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20190331/386cc546/attachment.html>