<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Eric -</p>
<p>You are to me as you indicate Packer is to you in this matter.
You have articulated well what I was only able to intuit.</p>
<p>I also feel vindicated (if only in the company of myself) in
having "mathematized" or "geometrized" this business of human
nature/intention as existing within differing basis spaces (Glen
asked me directly at one point "but why do you have to do that?",
to which I had no answer, good or lame at the time). Your own
attempt here (as I measure it) to tease out more dimensions that
might have been compressed/projected/collapsed into Packers's 4
(or as you point out, roughly 2x2).</p>
<p>I like your extension beyond dimensionality into actual material
substance with the addition of "visible fractures along the first
two pinciple components of stress", though as Glen likes to point
out, this is likely burdened by *some* kind of excess meaning,
especially if I were to try to carry it further.</p>
<p>Nothing more satisfying than being generously lapped by another
bumper-car driver with your signature style.<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A676BC9F-A716-4349-9C18-55B338A3C40E@santafe.edu">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Oct 29, 2021, at 4:32 PM, Steve Smith <<a
href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div class="">
<p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica;
font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps:
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal;
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"
class="">excellent reference/article... thanks.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>I agree, Marcus; thanks. I was struck that not only do I
wish I could write that way; I wish I could _think_ that way.
There are few thoughts I have had that aren’t already
contained in Packer’s synthesis, in forms compatible with or
better than the ones I would have given. (Usually those with
which I overlap aren’t different enough that I consider his
take on them a lot “better”: mostly I think he chooses well
the things I would front. The “better” part mostly comes from
a view that goes well beyond any that I could have commanded,
and much better ability to arrange it all into a coherent
layout.)</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica;
font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps:
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal;
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"
class="">Is it a 4 component spring model, or is a four
body problem in the orbital mechanics sense... probably no
harder than the three body problem?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>But I think the whole core of Packer’s article is that it
is not merely 4, but 2.x 2.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>There are axes of stress, and visible fractures along the
first two principle components of stress. </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>The Left-Right axis has resolved itself, in the current
era, into a kind of cultural-status axis, with educational
markers being a big part. But the axis is somehow more and
different than only that, as it has historically moved through
primacy of other dichotomies that can still be seen, while
retaining its essential nature: Open vs. Closed, Cosmopolitan
vs. Parochial, Communitarian vs. Dominance-ordered. None of
these seems quite adequate as I write them, but something
along that line.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>The Up-Down axis is probably about winners versus losers,
itself existing along several dimensions that have become
correlated. It can be conditions of living, or hope versus
despair w.r.t. power or agency as well as wealth or safety.
That is why Packer sets the Just up as an uprising against
the Smart, and the Real as an uprising against the Free. The
nature of the uprising and the stress driving it is in a sense
the same, and the establishment and the insurgency sort of
remain within whichever silos they started in. Mostly because
that phase is still fairly young.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Anything that becomes organized, it seems, becomes
available as a tool to entrench advantage in a setting where
competition never relents.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Eric</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a>
archives:
5/2017 thru present <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>