Just as a starter, Kuhn suggests that a field's history is largely represented in the new textbooks that accompany the paradigm shift. I'm thinking that if we don't have the textbooks (see Owen's thread), it's hard for us to even claim that a new paradigm exists ("there's no there there").
Robert
On 7/24/06, Michael Agar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, there's the roads, yeah, and then there's the...
Romans are the right metaphor, since much of what's happened in the
last X years has been diffusion of ideas--ideas, not measures--into
numerous different domains. Like Kuhn said...
Mike
On Jul 24, 2006, at 7:21 AM, Robert Holmes wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I really enjoyed Joe's post and it set me thinking - exactly what
> has complexity science achieved? IMHO, one measure of a field's
> health is that the field moves forward (radical, huh?). If I look
> at particle physics, they now know stuff that they didn't 15 years
> ago (neutrino mass for example); if I look at high-temperature
> superconductivity, Tc moves ever upwards. If I look at string
> theory they ask (and occassionally answer) ever more abstruse and
> unlikely questions that might not bear any relation to the real
> world but are at least based on what was asked before.
>
> So here's the question: in the field of complexity science, exactly
> what can we do now that we could not do 15 years ago?
>
> Robert
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
