Hm. Even with the caveat of "generally", I think this complementarity argument fails because all the various categories are not disjoint. And it's the (somewhat) lack(ing) of grounding/binding that allows the mixing of the modes. I'd tried to point this out by using "computation", the idea that human innovation might be more universal than microbial innovation. It's not really that the values *lack* grounding. It's that their grounding is complicated, perhaps iterative? maybe heterarchical? IDK, but certainly not lacking any grounding.
An abstracted value system like that of the 09A OR MAGA cults may have *more* power, more chances to hook and unhook because it gives the donner and doffer of that value system more opportunities to do the donning and doffing at whatever arbitrary points they choose, to lazily benefit themselves without having to handle any unintended/unconsidered entailments. On 10/8/23 18:18, Marcus Daniels wrote:
This doesn't make them more valuable because they lack grounding.
On 10/8/23 13:21, Marcus Daniels wrote:
Generally attaching to one value system means not attaching to another value system. For example, adopting the value of tolerance logically is at odds with policing intolerance, e.g., one Jewish neighbor remarked this morning he drove past a home with a Hamas flag on it and was scared. (Reducing that fear by removing the flag would be reducing tolerance.) It seems to me that ideas that work have power and things that don’t work don’t have power.
-- glen -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
