[FRIAM] J. Carter — collective virtue epistemology

[Prof David West]

There is a lyric - "Mr. Purple People Eater whats your line? Its eating purple people, and it sure is fine." Resolves the ambiguity.

davew


On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, at 6:09 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Brief responses, Dave.
> 
> When I first heard that song in 195? I wondered whether the eater or the people were purple.  Maybe everyone did.
> 
> I like your fair-minded rhetoric.  For example, "offers little" rather than "offers nothing".
> 
> I prefer pure math but I don't disdain applied math.  My dissertation was about finite element methods, a numerical analysis approach used in structural analysis, fluid mechanics, etc.
> 
> Is logical positivism a subfield of analytic philosophy?  I used to know.
> 
> As an anthroplogist you might appreciate this book about ethnic identity in New Mexico:
> 
> Nación Genízara: Ethnogenesis, Place, and Identity in New Mexico (Querencias Series) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0826361072/ref=cm_sw_r_em_apa_i_MpdnFbBG2K8TF
> 
> Frank
> 
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
> 
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 3:34 AM glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Excellent! This is the kind of skepticism I was incapable of formulating by myself. Thanks! I hope to revisit the paper now.
>> 
>> On August 12, 2020 12:55:02 PM PDT, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> >I promised to read and comment, so here goes.
>> >
>> >I really dislike (detest) this kind of analytic epistemology (analytic
>> >philosophy in general) as it contributes nothing to my understanding of
>> >how things are — how people think, why people have certain beliefs, how
>> >people judge something to be "true."
>> >
>> >Given Glen's commitment to Vico-ism, I am surprised he finds the
>> >article compelling in some way.
>> >
>> >Some questions:
>> >
>> >1- Does Carter know anything? I.e. is there an example of a bit of
>> >knowledge that came to be in his possession via the K-AB framework? He
>> >certainly does not provide one, even as an illustrative example. 
>> >
>> >2- Assuming that the K=AB framework is useful. How many 'trials' are
>> >required to constitute "aptness?" For a belief to transform to
>> >knowledge must it be the case that all trials were apt, most of the
>> >trials, a super majority of the trials?
>> >
>> >3- Can the K=AB framework yield an integrated body of knowledge, or
>> >merely the occasional isolated knowledge factoid?
>> >
>> >4- Does a belief and or a bit of knowledge need to be expressed in
>> >words? If so, exactly how does the K=AB framework resolve the inherent
>> >ambiguity of language?
>> >
>> >4b- For example: I believe I encountered and am having a discussion
>> >with a One-eyed One Horned Flying Purple People Eater. I apply the
>> >framework aptly and I now I know I am talking with one. What I do not
>> >know, however apt my belief, is whether or not the creature is purple
>> >or the people it eats are purple. At minimum the framework yields
>> >incomplete and ambiguous knowledge. ("I like short shorts.")
>> >
>> >5- Glen 'knows' Trump is an evil idiot. Can Glen lead me along the
>> >apt-path that resulted in that knowledge? Could Carter?
>> >
>> >6- Re: collective knowledge. Is a collective a 'Thing'? Can that Thing
>> >embody/contain/possess knowledge? (or belief?)
>> >
>> >7. Clearly, groups appear to share collective knowledge and belief - at
>> >least at a statistical level. It is even possible to observe what
>> >appears to be collective knowledge that does not exist, per se, in any
>> >of the members of the group — the Delphi technique would be one
>> >example. (Emergent knowledge from a complex system?)
>> >
>> >As a cognitive anthropologist, I am constantly challenged by the
>> >problem of explaining how culture — apparently shared collective
>> >knowledge, behavior, and ability — comes into existence, maintains
>> >itself, evolves, and adapts to changing contexts, including encounters
>> >with other cultures.
>> >
>> >Formalisms, like those espoused by Carter, are so far removed from
>> >concrete reality they offer little in the way of guidance or
>> >assistance. And advocates of those formalisms seldom have any interest
>> >in applied work any more than advocates of "pure" mathematics tend to
>> >denigrate applied math.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> glen
>> 
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200814/ff0cd8c1/attachment.html>