<div dir="ltr">"But it strikes me that one cannot simultaneously believe that all thinking is metaphorical and *not* admit to some form of the hard problem." <div><br></div><div>Those issues do not seem inherently related to me. Can you elaborate? If so, I might be able to respond better. </div><div><br></div><div>I'm pretty sure I disagree strongly with the claim that "all thinking is metaphorical", unless we mean "thinking" in some very narrow sense such that the claim somehow becomes true by definition. That disagreement probably isn't helping me in getting whatever you are getting at.</div><div></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br clear="all">-----------<br><div dir="ltr">Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.<br>Department of Justice - Personnel <span>Psychologist</span></div><div>American University - Adjunct Instructor</div><div></div></div><div dir="ltr"><a href="mailto:echarles@american.edu" target="_blank"></a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:32 PM u\u01ddl\u0183 \u2623 <<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com">gepropella@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">But how do we process this statement by Nick:<br>
<br>
On 4/17/20 4:08 PM, <a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
> I think an obsessively metaphorical thinker is one who has the arrogance to suppose that s/he has */some/* familiar experience by which s/he can model any experience of another person. I actually don't believe that that is true, but I think it is true enough that I feel it is my obligation to try. <br>
<br>
He's straight up *saying* that metaphor is used as a way to solve or gloss over the hard problem. Now, I don't particularly care if it's actually Nick we're talking about or some other "obssesively metaphorical thinker". But it strikes me that one cannot simultaneously believe that all thinking is metaphorical and *not* admit to some form of the hard problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 4/29/20 10:11 AM, Eric Charles wrote:<br>
> I think we should take the inadequacy of the wastebasket example as evidence that Nick is being honest about really, really not understanding what the hard problem is.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
\u2623 u\u01ddl\u0183<br>
<br>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>
FRIAM-COMIC</a> <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <br>
</blockquote></div>