<div dir="ltr">I can't speak for anyone else, but I suspect so. As an example of partially supported beliefs, I have no direct way of knowing that George Washington was the first president of the United States, or that he even existed. I choose to believe this, because I've heard and read about him, and I find it hard to believe that a conspiracy to instill a false assertion could have been pulled off. I could research further, which *might* reveal enough contradictions to invalidate my belief, but I choose not to. I take a similar approach to, for example, climate change.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 2:00 PM <<a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com">thompnickson2@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"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_-1596297882067248945WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal">Gary, <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Is this what others meant earlier by “truncation”?<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">N<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Nicholas Thompson<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Clark University<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(5,99,193)">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(5,99,193)">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</span></a><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Gary Schiltz<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 17, 2020 12:10 PM<br><b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] alternative response<u></u><u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><div><div><p class="MsoNormal">If I am honest, which I at least usually try to be, most beliefs that I have are only supported by the amount of effort I'm willing to put into the endeavor of supporting them. I can rationalize this by saying that nobody's brain, not even Einstein's, has (or had) the capacity to calculate and keep track of all the assumptions necessary to support our beliefs. I do believe this is true, even though it is more the result of my simply getting tired of or bored with trying to do so. Maybe this has a lot to do with why people have "faith", they just get tired of trying to figure it all out, and it is so much easier to accept what a large group of your peers tells you. I think true wisdom starts when one realizes those limitations.<u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:44 PM Jon Zingale <<a href="mailto:jonzingale@gmail.com" target="_blank">jonzingale@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p></div><blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in"><p class="MsoNormal">Nick,<br><br>Spoiler alert, there is no *how best to think*. You say random, Gary says<br>determined. Until you investigate the consequences of each you can't even<br>know whether or not you are actually developing the same model ( like with<br>the Church-Turing thesis). At the end of the day, deciding whether or not<br>the universe is determined, indeterminate, random, etc.. is decidedly<br>uninteresting. I try to hold 50 conflicting ontological commitments before<br>breakfast. Alas, it appears that we have no interest in working with the<br>commitments others make. In an effort to contribute to the banality I<br>propose 2401 or perhaps whatever number you would construct the fifth time<br>you follow Cantor's diagonal argument!<br><br><br><br>--<br>Sent from: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br><br>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div></div></div></div>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<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>
un/subscribe <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/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <br>
</blockquote></div>