[FRIAM] millenarianism

[Russ Abbott]

Thanks, Frank. I agree completely. This is a long-standing issue with Nick.
I'm glad you point out the similarities.

-- Russ Abbott
Professor, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles


On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:04 AM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> "It is SO evident to me that any conversation, even the most banal and
> proforma exchange of words, ... that I am blinded its self-evidentness,
> incapacitated by its obviousness, left without words."
>
> That's what I used to say to you about consciousness and having an inner
> life.
>
> Frank
>
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:56 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Steve,
>>
>>
>>
>> Craven tho it might be, I am going to desert you on this field of
>> battle.  It is SO evident to me that any conversation, even the most banal
>> and proforma exchange of words, is NOT a mere flapping of gums, that I am
>> blinded its self-evidentness, incapacitated by its obviousness, left
>> without words.
>>
>>
>>
>> You’re on your own, buddy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas Thompson
>>
>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>>
>> Clark University
>>
>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Steve Smith
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:39 AM
>> *To:* friam at redfish.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] millenarianism
>>
>>
>>
>> uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
>>
>> The argument I stole from wherever wasn't that talking was a *form* of grooming, but that it *replaced* grooming. Personally, I wouldn't go that far. I'd argue that as soon as we learned to talk, talking became yet-another-sensorimotor-behavior. I.e. talking is in the same category as having sex, punching someone in the face, riding a tandem bicycle, combing lice out of your kid's hair, etc. It's all the same thing.
>>
>> Well corrected... thanks.
>>
>> The gripe I have with most people is they reify their "thoughts", give too much primacy to the idea of material-free interaction. Words are nothing *but* flapping gums and banged keys.
>>
>> I will admit that having learned to type at a very early age (by oldSkool
>> standards...14) there is something *like* a visceral satisfaction in
>> banging the keys.   When I have forced myself to write longhand (see the
>> anecdote about a first grade teacher breaking a ruler on the knuckles) it
>> can *also* be viscerally satisfying, especially when using a fountain pen
>> on quality paper.   And yet I find "nothing more" hyperbolic.
>>
>> So, to Marcus' point, talking and punching are equally manipulative. And to Nick's point, talking to oneself can be very satisfying, like shadow boxing. But fighting an *alive* opponent is always more interesting.
>>
>> Touche' !
>>
>> What about "dancing"?  My limited experience with Tae Kwon Do peaked
>> during sparring which with the *right* opponent/partner felt more like
>> Dancing than Fighting.  Similarly with fencing (foil only for me, no sabres
>> or broadswords).  Neither felt choreographed.
>>
>> Some of our threads here feel more like squabbling than "dancing"... not
>> quite a melee (usually) even though there are some real free-for-all.
>>
>> I re-submit my previous question of the role/value/import of "an
>> audience/readership" participation.
>>
>> SS> In contrast on this (now bent) thread,  Marcel Duchamp stated
>> (authoritatively?!):
>>
>>  “All in all, the creative act is not performed by the artist alone; the
>> spectator brings the work in contact with the external world by deciphering
>> and interpreting its inner qualifications and thus adds his contribution to
>> the creative act,”
>>
>> SS> Many creatives (visual artists, writers, and more obviously
>> performing artists) have agreed with this...   the audience "participation"
>> if not "response" is key to their "completion"...  I don't know if this
>> maps onto "closure" in CS, but maybe.
>>
>> - Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/6/20 3:06 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
>>
>> Glen has suggested variously that he doesn't believe in communication, and that in humans "dialog is a form of social grooming" (I stand prepared to be corrected for mis-apprehending/stating Glen's positions).
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm inclined to agree with him somewhat, though I DO believe some of our chatter is at least an *attempt to communicate*.   So is that *all* we are doing when we blather away here?  Or perhaps just Bombastic Careening (nod to Jon)?  Mental Masturbation?   Dominance Aggression?  Random Neuromuscular Spasms?
>>
>>
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-..
>> -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
>> 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/
>>
>
>
> --
> Frank Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 505 670-9918
> - .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-..
> -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
> 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/20200607/4f8068b9/attachment.html>