[FRIAM] Friam Norms of Thread Bending

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

On 3/23/21 2:23 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> Like all healthy communities, I'm glad to see continued "good natured
> heckling" amongst the most vocal here.
> 
> 
> On 3/23/21 2:06 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
>> If your are correct that the comment "self-comstrained"  then I was fool to pay any attention to it whatsoever.  Fools rush in... etc.  

I think Dave prophetically argued (in the OP) against Nick's later claim to foolishness (see below). It's not foolish to pay attention to EricC's spandrel-like thread bending. It is a hallmark of nonlinear thinking.

On 3/23/21 8:11 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> This also means, that individual feature-traits — ... — cannot, and should not be "explained" independently. To do so is to focus on the 'noise' and not the 'signal'. Such efforts are the product of 19th century thinking and unworthy of complexity scientists like yourselves.




-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ