[FRIAM] alternative response

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

Aw, booo!

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 12:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response

 

The Shadow.

 

And I didn't look it up.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

 

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020, 12:43 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> > wrote:

Russ, 

 

I seem to have confounded two issues, here: Is Engineering ever a science, and is software engineering in any sense a science?  Will we ever converge on the Best Way To Build A Bridge?  And, Is Software engineering like bridge-building?   I guess that in bridge building there are certain harsh realities to which we must conform.  Are there any harsh realities to which software engineering must conform?  What are they?  Does having to conform to harsh realities make an activity a science?

 

“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?”  [I bet you nobody on this list knows the origin of that quote without looking it up.]

 

Nick 

 

 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com> > On Behalf Of Russ Abbott
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 12:36 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response

 

"Science" is generally defined as the study of the natural world. If we take that to exclude man-made artifacts and processes, software engineering (by definition) is not a science.

 

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

 

 

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 11:27 AM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com <mailto:marcus at snoutfarm.com> > wrote:

< So, software engineering is not a science. It’s a culture?  There is no right or wrong about it?  >

 

In practice, it is a culture.   People cling to their beliefs and their habits, like the racists do.   Attempts to intervene cause a lot of turmoil.   Intervention sometimes seems urgent, but really it is probably better to avoid these cultures.

 

Marcus

 

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://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/ 

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://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/20200614/44be6e19/attachment.html>