[FRIAM] alternative response

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

I disagree.  I think we are making claims about how best to think, if we
ever hope to get anywhere.  

But I can see that these might seem like "old man's arguments" and that the
world of software engineering is "no place for old men."  

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 Jon Zingale
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 8:33 AM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response

The preoccupation with arguing over base ontological commitments reminds me
of the *existential detectives* and their nemesis in the movie *I <3
Huckabees*. Will demanding that the universe is determined, or almost as
random as can be, or simulatable move any other conjectured model forward? I
suspect that it has the effect of putting the discussion in a holding
pattern. In each case, we are making unknown claims as to what the universe
is, or at best wagering as to what we feel the universe will have turned out
to be in some obnoxiously absolute way.
Neutered from a motivating investigation and the development of a model, we
may as well exclaim the names of numbers at one another.



--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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/