[FRIAM] Eternal questions

Sun Aug 29 12:58:11 EDT 2021

I know.  If we agreed without realizing it think of the time and work we've
spent.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 10:11 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Frenemy,
>
>
>
> What I HOPE I said is that you have no special means of access, no
> infallible aprehension of your own states.  I hope I did not say that you
> have no information that I do not have, because that would be absurd.
> Every point of view gives access to different sources of [fallible]
> information.
>
>
>
> Geez!  I would hate to think that we AGREED after all these years.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> Nick Thompson
>
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 29, 2021 11:04 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Eternal questions
>
>
>
> Nick,
>
>
>
> I can't find the message to which this is an appropriate reply.  Did you
> know once say to me that I have no private inner life or not?  Maybe I have
> a false memory.
>
> Frank
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 12:22 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ach!  My point was I don't think you need organisms, or minds, or any of
> the "hard" stuff, to run into the logical problems entailed in moving
> between levels of organization.  Perhaps I am just too old, too slow,  too
> HOT, too uninformed, to be in this argument, right now. Or ever?    Not
> without some help in language mediation, anyway, from some of my trusties,
> who are absent from the conversation.   So, I bow out.   But I love you all.
>
> N
>
> Nick Thompson
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 2:08 PM
> To: friam at redfish.com
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Eternal questions
>
> Choosing a particular emotion misses the point, confuses the noise for the
> signal. The polyphenism, alone, demonstrates that starting with a
> particular emotion and working inversely from that phenotype to the
> generators is guaranteed to be a difficult problem ... you're guaranteeing
> that we stay stuck in this argument forever.
>
> Instead, work on the forward map from generator to phenomenon. The article
> Roger posted goes a long way to helping us understand how to get from
> molecules (or tissue, at least) to either glucose regulation or
> storage/retrieval. And we're not talking about billiard balls. We're
> talking about ion channels, neuron firing, collections of neurons firing,
> anatomical tissue and patterns of firing correlated with such tissue, and
> finally spectral analyses of such firing patterns. That carries us along a
> forward map from molecules to consciousness (or, at least, perception).
>
> And I don't think we're going to get to EricS' question without that
> compositional stack, because we're going to have to talk about which parts
> are Markovian and which parts are not (or are high-order Markovian).
>
> On 8/26/21 9:34 AM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> > I guess I think in levels of organization, and my rants are always of
> > the form, Grant Each Level Its Due and Do Not Confuse Them.  So you can
> discuss the amygdala all you want, but you still have not described, or
> identified, fear.
> >
> >
> >
> > So, you ask, how would a person of my persuasion go about explaining
> > the relation between the molecules in my skin  and the excitation of
> those elections that produce on my screen, what I am writing.  Never mind
> the socalled hard problem (the problem of the soul). Let’s figure out a way
> to talk about that.
> >
> >
> >
> > Or for that matter, let’s make it even simpler:  Let’s talk about the
> > relation between the molecules of a cue  ball that result in the motion
> of the eightball into a pocket and the loss of the game.   Let’s even do
> some spherical cowing here and assume that one, and only one molecule of
> the cue ball touches one and only one molecule of the eightball.  Is this a
> good model?   Have I understood the question right?
> >
> >
> >
> > I don’t think Nick should say “I am my fear.”  I think he should say
> > “I am the sum total of all the things that I do and that fear is one of
> the things I do”.   Or, perhaps, to put it in terms of experience-monism,
> “I am all that I experience and when I experience my flight behavior in
> relation to my experience of my circumstances I experience my fear.”
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I have to get back to that message from EricS that I bungled my response
> to.
>
> --
> ☤>$ uǝlƃ
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 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
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210829/820062b7/attachment.html>