<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>David -</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title></title>
<style type="text/css">p.MsoNormal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}</style>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">Steven,<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">Is is a pleasure to do discourse
with you.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
The pleasure is mutual.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">Minor clarification: When I
mention "sentient life" I do indeed include all life. In fact,
given that I take as a working assumption the Vedic (and then
Buddhist) notion that the entire universe, all the way down to
quanta is an admixture of purusa (mind) and prakrti (matter) so
even a 'string' is sentient. Pragmatically, I focus on
multi-cellular lifeforms that I can actually sense / interact
with.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
This is the sense which I prefer and acknowledge the pragmatic
limits implied by "that which I can actually sense/interact with."
I would like to learn more about your Vedic (cum Buddhist?)
groundings in the philosophical (often shrouded in political)
discussions here. Or maybe it just helps that you have made them
explicit (or I have finally heard your explication of them).<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">"Willful ignorance" — I would
indeed assert that most people are willfully ignorant most of
the time, that the vast majority live lives that are
"unexamined" ala Plato. This is the reason that I am very,
very, wary of "pure democracy."<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
It seems to come with our language functions to be both willful and
ignorant. Animals which we presume to have no significant language
ability, have a very different quality of each "will" and
"ignorance" and I don't think "willful ignorance" really makes sense
for them except to the extent that we humans project that onto
them. My dogs can seem to exhibit willful ignorance, but I think
something less complicated is going on. They can definitely be
willful, and they do something which is like feigning ignorance
(e.g. pretending not to hear me until I rattle the milk-bone box,
breaking that illusion).<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">Christopher Alexander spoke at
OOPSLA a decade ago — an architect talking to software
professionals. He noted that professional architects influence
roughly 10% of the built world, but software folk will influence
100 percent, and not just the physical "built" world, but every
aspect of life, redefining work, play. culture ....<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
I'm a fan of Alexander, mildly for his architectural/urbanist work,
almost not at all for his influence of SW and "design patterns", but
hugely for the abstract underpinnings of form and function. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">"With great power comes great
responsibility." Alas the software folks have refused to accept
the responsibility that goes hand in hand with the power they
have. And this is a case of dramatic "willful ignorance" on the
part of the software community, but also those engaged in city
and social planning efforts. Everything they do affects people —
individually, collectively, socio-politically, and culturally —
and yet they are "willfully ignorant" of people.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Much of my work over the decades has been roughly in the realm of
"user interface"... not exactly or always directly involving
building UI's, but rather centered on the problem of how to help
humans be more effective/efficient through the leverage/mediation of
computers. The culture of "willful ignorance" in systems analysts,
software engineers, coders, etc. is extreme. And I believe it
inherits from the techno-utopian/techno-cratic mindset of
Scientists, Engineers, and Technologists in general. Present
(collective) company included. Pogo and Scott Adams both seemed to
have our number from early on: "We have met the enemy and they is
us!"<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">The attached paper was presented
at PURPLSOC (software, city planning, social change agents) in
Austria last fall. It became the featured paper of the
conference and proceedings. I think you might find it
interesting, and, hopefully, find some seeds for further
discussion of how a social construct might evolve from the kind
of individualism we both seem to resonate to.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Thanks, I'll take a look. I knew through Jenny that you had been
(presenting?) at a conference on patterns last year, but hadn't
bothered to follow up. From the Abstract, I think I'll find plenty
of meat to chew on and try to respond responsibly to it.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1547220418.1627278.1631943464.4CF568AF@webmail.messagingengine.com">
<div style="font-family:Arial;">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Arial;">[The professor at Macalester
College that inspired my interest in utopian/designed
communities was Hildegarde B. Johnson. Just remembered her full
name.]<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Just looked her up... fascinating story of maintaining/promoting
Geography in the Liberal Arts.</p>
<p>-sas<br>
</p>
<br>
</body>
</html>