[FRIAM] description - explanation - metaphor - model - and reply

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

Marcus, 

I am not sure I understand what you say here.  But I like the idea of "listening generously" and I am trying to do it.  I guess my problem in understanding is that I don't think we perceive anything other than in a context.  Like the gorilla walking through the basketball game, we just don't see it.  I don't think it's possible to see Eric and not see him intending.  (or, say, sleeping).  This may, in fact, be an argument in favor of your position.  I just haven't worked it out yet. 

Eric's argument against my position is even more troubling.  I WAS playing fast and loose with levels of organization. 

I am going to have to think about all of this. 

Nick 

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 1:52 PM
To: FriAM <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] description - explanation - metaphor - model - and reply

It would be easier if you would use a word like "artifact" or somesuch when you talk about the model absent it's contextual analogies. E.g. some yahoo back 10k years ago draws a picture and some teenage spelunker comes upon it in 2020. That picture is better described as "artifact" than "picture".

To reword: the artifact you call "Eric" doesn't intend anything. But when you use that artifact to get him to do something, then the artifact+usage _intends_ that something. Some may argue that the word "model" shouldn't be used unless the usage/context is present. But that's a load of sophistry, I think. People will use whatever word they want to use whenever they want to use it. So we just have to be flexible and listen generously.

On 1/15/20 12:44 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> To me, you are a model, right?  Whatever you are, it is my model of you with which I am dealing.  So, when you intend something  by a model, it is a case of a model intending a model, right?  So, models intend, right?  So why not just say so, in the first instance.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove