<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dave -</p>
<p>Your invocation of Sheldrake/Morphenetic Fields was a nice
surprise. I think you are on to something with that connection
and I would suggest that Hoffman's work does support Sheldrake in
a distant/qualitative way without endorsing his specifics. <br>
</p>
<p>I am also reminded of a Science Fiction novel by David Brin, "The
Practice Effect" which has been discussed here before (someone
corrected/reminded me of the proper source last time I mentioned
it at least). Morphogenetics seems about as believeable as "the
Practice Effect" as presented. I *would* be interested in more
elaboration by yourself and others on how you see Hoffman and
Sheldrake living on the same continuum and the landscape between
them.</p>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/13/19 8:51 AM, Nick Thompson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:00bf01d56a42$cb683e50$6238baf0$@earthlink.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoPlainText">Dave, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Please see larding below!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Nicholas S. Thompson<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Emeritus Professor of Psychology and
Biology<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Clark University<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/">http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Friam [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com">mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>] On Behalf Of
Prof David West<br>
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 5:12 AM<br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a><br>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] query and observation</p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">this is the FRIAM I knew and loved,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>Your
use of the past tense makes me nervous. When ARE you
coming back? <==nst] </span></i></b><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">As one of the deluded ones claiming
direct, non intermediated, perception of that which is behind
Hoffman's interface, his arguments are not surprising. Blaming
the existence of the interface on evolution was kind of new
and interesting.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>I
am too demented right now to give this the consideration
it deserves, but you, Dave, have always been generous
about my dementias, so I am going to allow myself to
continue, here. I just want to know, though, how you
tell the difference between your direct knowledge, and
the other kind. Does direct knowledge come with little
“d” icons attached? So, not only do you have direct
knowledge but you also have direct knowledge that that
knowledge is direct, and direct knowledge that your
knowledge of that knowledge is direct and ….ad finitum.
Just checking. <==nst] </span></i></b><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">It is the juxtaposition, entirely
coincidental, of Hoffman with Heidegger, Gadamer, and the
whole hermeneutic school of philosophy that caused the
greatest amount of thinking. Although not a hermeneuticist per
se, Peirce seems to be at minimum, a fellow traveler.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>Yes,
I agree. Although, in my present demented state, I
wouldn’t know a Gadamer if it bit me on my ankle.
<==nst] </span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">The claim by Hoffman, and all the
physicists he cites, that the only thing we can know is the
interface and whatever is behind that interface is not what
everyone thinks it is, i.e. Objective Reality˛— seems to
parallel the hermeneutic position that all we can know is the
interpretation and whatever is behind the interpretation is
not what every thinks it is, i.e. Truth.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>You
dualists offer us a false choice. Either we must assert
a truth beyond experience, or deny any truth at all. By
why not a truth IN experience. Truth is a
[mathematical] property of experience. That upon which
human experience converges. Truth is just what keeps
banging us on the head as we grope around in the dark.
<==nst] </span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Nick's monism seems. to me, to be
similar with Behavior more or less the same thing as Interface
or Interpretation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>Well,
yes, but with Peirce’s pragmatic[ist] notion of truth.
Some methodological behaviorists [Watson] were proper
dualists, asserting only that talk of events beyond
experience was scientifically nugatory. Philosophical
behaviorists [Wittgenstein??] assert that talk of
events beyond experience is MEANINGLESS. <==nst] </span></i></b><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Hoffman's argument that, because we are
all humanoids and share the same spot in the evolutionary
sequence, we share a common, mostly, Interface made me think
immediately of Rupert Sheldrake and morphogenetic fields.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[NST==>I
can’t call up Sheldrake at the moment, but if you are
talking about the manner in which development channels
us into common paths, the fact that even though there is
tremendous randomness in epigenetic processes, yet we
all end up looking [pretty much] the same, then, yes, I
think the metaphor is excellent. <==nst] </span></i></b><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">It is not the book, in itself, it is the
connections that are fascinating.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">davew<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">On Fri, Sep 13, 2019, at 4:05 AM, glen<span
style="font-family:"Cambria Math",serif">∈ℂ</span>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> Heh, I doubt you're missing my
point. And please don't mistake my <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> defense/explanation of Hoffman as
advocacy. I think it's interesting.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> But he relies too much, IMO, on
idealized modeling. So, I don't think <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> the interface idea is really all
that important. But it is interesting.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> To me, though, the way the
interface idea directly impacts my <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> day-to-day actions is in
facilitating my (already present) doubt about <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> any metaphysical claims. When some
arbitrary person tells me *why* <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> they made some decision like
accepting a job offer or whatever, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> Hoffman's idea helps me understand
their rationale. E.g. in the <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> *simple* strategy, where an agent
makes their decision on the <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> green/red heuristic, if that agent
*talks* in terms of green and red, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> then my judgment of them is
positive. If, however, that agent <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> hand-waves themselves into
metaphysical hooha about why they made <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> their decision, then my judgment is
negative.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> Practically, we could talk about
that the "singularity" is fideistic. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> Or we could talk about Renee's
son's belief in "the principle of <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> attraction". Or from cognitive
behavior therapy, concepts like <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> "catastrophizing" are
understandable in these terms. When a 15 year <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> old exclaims that "My parents will
kill me" it's an exclamation that's <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> not very easy to understand for
someone whose actually had someone try <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> to kill them. But if we understand
the boundaries and extent of the <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> control surface one has access to,
it makes the exclamation more <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> understandable.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> I've mentioned this in the context
of "code switching". The ability to <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> put oneself in the shoes of another
depends, fundamentally, on <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> how/whether you can doff or don
their "interface". More speculatively, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> I've had a lot of trouble
sympathizing with the idiots who voted for <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> Trump. But I can divide any 2 Trump
supporters into those who *refuse* <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> to make "metaphysical" statements
and those who adhere closely to <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> "what I thought at the time".<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> To me, the hygienic examples of
heliocentrism etc. are impoverished. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> The usefulness is more about
how/when to recognize when someone's <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> "blowing smoke" or being authentic
in describing their inner life. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> It's possible the reason some of us
might have trouble seeing how the <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> idea would matter is because *some*
of us already doubt much/most of <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> what people, including our selves,
say. And that we don't need the <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> interface idea to be so doubtful?
8^)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> On 9/12/19 5:38 PM, Steven A Smith
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > I may be missing your point
badly, but your response lead me to flip <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > my thinking inside out and ask
myself just what I mean by "so what" <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > and realized that *might* be
the central point to Hoffman's argument.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > My "so what?" perhaps
illuminates Hoffman's argument: The utility <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > of my perception of the sun
and moon as orbiting the earth (or <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > actually more typically of
them arcing across the surface of one or <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > more fixed<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > domes) is higher in most
contexts than perceiving them as being <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > involved in a much more
abstract (albeit elegantly simpler?) <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > relationship formulized by
GmM/r^2. This "utility landscape" IS <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > the fitness landscape for
evolution. Obviously there must be <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > "gateways" (passes, tunnels,
etc.) from the portion of this <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > landscape we live in everyday
to the ones say where we are trying to <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > predict uncommon astronomical
observations (e.g. eclipses).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > I didn't mean to suggest that
I didn't think the work was important <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > or interesting or fundamental,
only that I don't see how it changes <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > how I live my everyday life
for the most part. I am *literally* <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > trying to invert my
metaperceptions to see how I could be directly <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > aware that my perceptions are
an interface, not a direct response to <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > reality... all easy to do
intellectually (once some thought has been <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> > put into it) but not so easy
to apprehend even indirectly?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">>
============================================================<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group
listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> at St. John's College to
unsubscribe <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> <a
href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> archives back to 2003: <a
href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">> FRIAM-COMIC <a
href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</span></a>
by Dr. Strangelove<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">============================================================<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St.
John's College to unsubscribe <a
href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">archives back to 2003: <a
href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">FRIAM-COMIC <a
href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</span></a>
by Dr. Strangelove<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
archives back to 2003: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>