[FRIAM] academia as a market of ideas

[Steve Smith]

I do think some commonality is required... the "rules of the exchanges"
are a shared language, albeit with a very restricted lexicon.  I also
think that the relative valuation of trade-goods is a key...  there must
be some asymmetry in valuation to "drive the engine"...  else there is
no exchange where both A) and B)

I have in my memory a possibly apocryphal or at least stylized/idealized
variation as simple as:

 1. Alice gifts Bob with a small but significant gift
 2. Bob accepts it and either
     1. walks away
     2. or returns a more significant gift
 3. Alice accepts this in return and either
     1. walks away
     2. or returns a more significant gift

This naturally continues until one or the other no longer feels their
exchanges are worthy or they run out of gifts to offer.  Assuming a
large pool of gift-traders, Bob and Alice find Ted and Carol and repeat,
possibly regifting some of those they just received.    If both have
been honest and earnest in their gifting, then at worse Bob or Carol is
out their perceived value of the increment between the last gift, and if
there is synergy then both have a perceived increased value from their
trades.  

I suppose one could consider this a parallel sorting algorithm with
fuzzy (or contingent) values of the gifts implied.   It seems as if it
avoids (or minimizes) "Gift of the Magi" paradoxes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gift_of_the_Magi


On 2/19/21 8:41 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> A "market" found in aboriginal Australia and the South Pacific:
>
> 1- the two sides never spoke, only one side was "in the market" at any given time.
> 2- side A put out piles of the goods(A) they wanted to trade then leave.
> 3- side B would place their trade goods(B) near the goods(A) they wished to purchase, then leave.
> 4-Side A would remove piles that had no goods(B) and factor the goods(A) piles into smaller lots, then leave.
> 5-Side B would add good(B) to the smaller good(A) piles.
> 4-5 would continue until there was no change in the good(A) and good(B) piles — indicating that X amount of Good(A) was worth Y amount of Good(B)
>
> No "commonality" of which glen speaks.
>
> Academia does not function as such a market, but I think FRIAM might. Lot's of ideas put out that attract no response while others spawn long threads. This is a kind of "valuation" of the original idea to others on the list.
>
> davew
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021, at 2:29 PM, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote:
>> IDK, my joke response earlier was intended to say that I can't parse 
>> "market of ideas". A market requires some common measure (e.g. 
>> currency) to which everything is reduced and with which the things are 
>> bought and sold. If it's a market, what is that measure? You could make 
>> an argument that the measure need not be a reduction ... like some sort 
>> of barter. But there would still need to be some commonality, perhaps a 
>> language like English. And my guess is each idea domain has its own 
>> jargon, which implies the domains would all need to be 
>> inter-translatable ... and that would require some discussion of how 
>> isomorphic the languages are. 
>>
>> I'd argue part of why Nick thinks Sober is a tourist is because their 
>> languages don't match very well. Hence, either it's not a market or 
>> these 2 traders are bad at trading ... or somesuch.
>>
>> On 2/18/21 12:44 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
>>> I would think the metaphor is quite precise, since the same force that
>>> distorts a commercial market place -- accrued power -- also distorts an
>>> academic one.   I guess you might say -- I might say -- that when Sober
>>> publishes in a behavior journal, he is using his power in one domain --
>>> philosophy of biology --  to tour in another.  To make that case I would
>>> have to show that the argument he makes is not only shabby in behavioral
>>> terms, but no reason to claim that behavioral presuppositions are
>>> inconsistent with more general principles of science.  A heavy lift?
>>>
>>> Nick Thompson
>>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of jon zingale
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 1:37 PM
>>> To: friam at redfish.com
>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Watch Mars landing this afternoon
>>>
>>> Speaking of efficiency, to what extent is it fair to consider academia an
>>> efficient market of ideas? To the degree that it is, would this justify
>>> conceptual tourism?
>> -- 
>> ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> 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/
>>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210219/da6949b1/attachment.html>