[FRIAM] Morphogenisis

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

While there is quite a bit of prodding that I owe you regarding what I read
as ambiguity about universality and generality among the pragmatists*, the
bigger fish to fry is that you are not so likely to accept the possibility
(reality?) of the singular. With all of the forces that contributors to this
forum supply, what is a poor boy to do?

Indeed!  I ask myself that question every day?

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: Sunday, May 9, 2021 1:58 PM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Morphogenisis

 

Please understand the context for my writing here: while waiting with bated
breath for EricS's response to my prodding[0], I am working to better
understand the larger discussion and to read EricS's paper[1].

 

Lately, I am working to extend grace to others in their attempts to describe
the world. For instance, when Chemero offers a dynamical systems alternative
to computation, I recognize that my knee jerks are perhaps simply my own. He
may mean something that I have yet to understand and that projecting my own
sense that dynamical systems are *just* systems of differential (or
difference) equations will cause a break from grace and that I will lose an
opportunity. Similarly, I am working to understand Roger's blogger in a
context that reconciles Chemero and Valiant (and why shouldn't I? Roger
posted his post in response to my own). All the while, I hope to continue to
allow the insights offered by Deleuze[2] to nourish these connections and to
help me make sense of any emergent meaning.

 

Oh well, in the meantime, back to Haldane and 150 years of attempts to
characterize fitness, back to evolutions involving ideal functions that
specify proteins and their relations, back to wondering how the notion of
functor could help to clarify that we are not simply concerned with
transitions between sets, but some hopefully specifiable excess of meaning.

 

[0]  <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/no-subject-td7601231.html#a7601880>
http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/no-subject-td7601231.html#a7601880

 

[1] And yes, I have many other questions there not applicable to this thread
as of yet. For instance, how is a hypergraph different than a topology? Are
hypergraphs also generalizations of topologies?

 

[2] For instance, his insights into the differences between generality and
universality, and their duals(?), particularity and singularity.

While there is quite a bit of prodding that I owe you regarding what I read
as ambiguity about universality and generality among the pragmaticists, the
bigger fish to fry is that you are not so likely to accept the possibility
(reality?) of the singular. With all of the forces that contributors to this
forum supply, what is a poor boy to do?

 

 

 

--

Sent from:  <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
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>
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC  <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/>
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

archives:  <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210509/6cfd07d5/attachment.html>