Kuhn's book (all of it) has had a substantive impact on my overall intellectual and analytical development (and I'm neither a scientist nor a philosopher). I consider it a truly seminal work, and imho well worth any thinking person's time.
And, you get to feel cool because you know where "paradigm shift" came from ;-) David dba | David Breecker Associates, Inc. www.BreeckerAssociates.com Abiquiu: 505-685-4891 Santa Fe: 505-690-2335 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicholas Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 8:14 AM Subject: Re: [FRIAM] kuhn > All -- Everybody should "read" The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, > which is to say, start it and see how far you get before you are totally > bogged down. But, my philosopher friends warn me, that book does not > contain Kuhn's mature opinion. I am afraid I have never gotten beyond his > immature ones. > > "My philosopher friends" also tell me that the two volume Encyclopedia of > Philosophy is the best philosophy crib notes ever, respectable for > citation, even. > > Nick > Nicholas Thompson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson > > >> [Original Message] >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Date: 7/25/2006 10:31:21 PM >> Subject: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 46 >> >> Send Friam mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done for us? >> (Carlos Gershenson) >> 2. Re: What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done for us? >> (Robert Holmes) >> 3. Is it economics or biology (Tom Johnson) >> 4. Re: Definition of Complexity (Robert Holmes) >> 5. Re: What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done for us? >> (Phil Henshaw) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:56:19 +0200 >> From: Carlos Gershenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done >> for us? >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >> <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" >> >> I think this discussion is productive, because it seems it is >> bringing some light and agreement on "what is complexity and what it >> is not"... >> >> > I didn't form the question well - what I meant was: what can we do >> > now that we couldn't do 15 years before as a direct consequence of >> > advances in complexity science? >> >> In line with what other people have said, complexity has been >> invading all sciences. e.g. you cannot do systems biology without >> taking a complexity stance, but all these advances will be seen as >> biology or medicine... >> Same for other disciplines... so maybe the question could be >> >> what can we do now that we couldn't do 15 years ago as a consequence >> of complexity thinking? >> >> Then the list I gave earlier would be a valid answer... even if the >> advances come from physics, biology, engineering, they required ideas >> from complex systems... >> >> Best regards, >> >> Carlos Gershenson... >> Centrum Leo Apostel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel >> Krijgskundestraat 33. B-1160 Brussels, Belgium >> http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~cgershen/ >> >> ?Tendencies tend to change...? >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060725/34560ae7/attachment-0001.h > tml >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:26:53 -0600 >> From: "Robert Holmes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done >> for us? >> To: FRIAM <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> I'll be honest, I cheated. I could have gone to the source and read the >> man's own words, but sometimes it's just easier to read the Cliff notes > (or >> equivalent). In this case: >> >> http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/kuhnsyn.html >> >> Robert >> >> On 7/25/06, Owen Densmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > Which if Kuhn's books would be good to read? There are apparently >> > several! >> > >> > -- Owen >> > >> > Owen Densmore >> > http://backspaces.net - http://redfish.com - http://friam.org >> > >> > >> > On Jul 24, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Robert Holmes wrote: >> > >> > > You beat me to it Mike. I was re-reading Kuhn this morning because >> > > I'm >> > > pretty darn sure that complexity science is failing to establish >> > > itself as a >> > > paradigm, and I wanted support for this contention from someone a >> > > whole load >> > > cleverer than me. I'll report back on my readings... >> > > >> > > 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 >> > >> > >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060725/8ba86f35/attachment-0001.h > tml >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:40:29 -0600 >> From: "Tom Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: [FRIAM] Is it economics or biology >> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED] com" <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Of interest to the list, I hope. >> >From the current issue of The Economist: >> The Cambrian age of >> > economics<http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7189617 >> >> Evolutionary economics is surviving, but not thriving >> >> http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7189617 >> >> -- tj >> >> ========================================== >> J. T. Johnson >> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA >> www.analyticjournalism.com >> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h) >> http://www.jtjohnson.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. >> To change something, build a new model that makes the >> existing model obsolete." >> -- Buckminster Fuller >> ========================================== >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060725/1b1906ea/attachment-0001.h > tml >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:46:12 -0600 >> From: "Robert Holmes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Definition of Complexity >> To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" >> <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> > >> > >> > One can certainly start from the partition function. But the partition >> > function is something that is additional to the microscopic >> > description, hence emergent. Indeed, the partition function is >> > different depending on whether you are using microcanonical, canonical >> > or grand canonical ensembles, each of which is a thermodynamic, not >> > microscopic concept. >> >> >> I'm surprised that you consider the partition function as being "in >> addition" to the microscopic description. Is this the common view in >> statistical mechanics? Just to be specific, if I've got a system of >> distinguishable particles and the energy levels aren't degenerate, the >> single particle partition function Zsp is given by: >> >> Zsp = sum( exp( -ei/k.T ) ) >> where ei is the energy of the energy level i, the sum is over all i (i.e. >> over all energy levels), k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the >> temperature. >> >> Now that seems about as microscopic description of a system as you can > get. >> Could you explain why it's not please? >> >> Thanks for your patience! >> >> Robert >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060725/95bc13de/attachment-0001.h > tml >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:30:59 -0400 >> From: "Phil Henshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done >> for us? >> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" >> <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> If you actually wanted an opening to complexity theory that would >> actually >> assist government decision making, you'd learn to train computers how to >> recognize the mathematical difference between homeostatic fluctuation and >> structural divergence. >> >> >> >> Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> 680 Ft. Washington Ave >> NY NY 10040 >> tel: 212-795-4844 >> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: McNamara, Laura A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >> McNamara, Laura A >> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 9:15 AM >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >> Subject: RE: [FRIAM] What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done for > us? >> >> >> To follow on Mike's comments: what SFI, NECSI, UCLA, and other hotbeds of >> complex thinking have in common is some luxury to consider complexity, >> modeling, and social evolution, to creatively push the application of >> complex systems studies to culture and society. >> >> And here I go on my soapbox (with apologies to those of you who've heard > me >> rant about this before): what's disturbing is the number of people in >> government (go figure) who are touting agent based models and complexity > as >> predictive tool and theory, respectively, for making decisions about >> wickedly complex quagmires in places like... oh, maybe Iraq...? I'm >> spending the summer studying computational modeling and simulation >> technologies in the DoD and the level of interest in complexity theory as >> the holy grail of social theory is both remarkable and worrisome. This >> being Washington, I've seen more than a few contractors grabbing at DoD >> money to get that grail up and running, without considering the manifold >> issues involved. My Sandia colleague, Tim Trucano, and I are gearing up >> to >> write about this issue and will likely be at FRIAM quite a bit to toss > ideas >> around with y'all. >> >> Lurking in the discourse about complexity, computational modeling, and >> society is epistemological question, I think, that requires us to >> consider >> how we use modeling and simulation tools to produce knowledge about the >> world we live in. In academia, we have a great deal of latitude in the >> purpose of knowledge-making activities; we're engaged in discovery over > the >> long run. Inside the Beltway, it's a different story entirely: they want >> decision tools, and they want them yesterday. >> >> Of course, this begs the question of why common sense is so utterly >> absent >> in our nation's fine capitol... >> >> Laura >> >> >> _____ >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Michael Agar >> Sent: Tue 7/25/2006 6:49 AM >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What have the Romans - sorry - complexity done for > us? >> >> >> >> >> On Jul 24, 2006, at 6:51 AM, Russell Standish wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > But more seriously, which university has a department of complex >> > systems? Theres the Santa Fe Institute, and possibly NECSI, but where >> > else? >> > >> >> SFI and NECSI make room for visiting students at different levels, >> but neither are degree-granting. In the social realm, >> UCLA has a new Human Complex Systems institute that is going >> gangbusters in its first year, but it is undergrad only right now, >> though the interest there hints that the younger generation is into >> it already. At NECSI the Portland State University computer science >> program drew some student attention, since they can cobble together >> complexity like courses of study. Couple of student emails on the >> NECSI list pointed to other possibillities, like George Mason >> University's Center for Social Complexity. Otherwise it seems like >> academic pockets in various domains. For instance, at NECSI I met a >> student who works with Reuben McDaniels, prof at the University of >> Texas biz school, known on the Plexus list for his work applying >> complexity org development to health care. He works with their >> Prigogine Center, though I'm not sure what they do. I'm sure there >> are many other centers and institutes and academic pockets that folks >> on the list know of as well, and many others in other countries. >> David Lane's group at Reggio-Modena comes to mind. It's an >> interesting "shreds and patches" kind of situation that probably >> reflects the scattered and multi-perspectival nature of the field at >> the moment that motivated Owen's original email. >> >> I've been disappointed that anthro hasn't been more active, though >> there are some good SFI external faculty examples like Steve Lansing >> in ecology and Doug White in networks and George Gummerman and Tim >> Kohler on the ancient Anasazi (a questionable label now, since it is >> a Navajo term and some Pueblo people object). Shortly before >> electricity was invented, when I was in grad school, we learned about >> our "holistic" perspective and the "emergent" nature of our work and >> how our goal was to learn a new perspective "bottom-up," though that >> term we didn't use. Sander van der Leeuw, former SFI faculty, took >> over the department at Arizona State and looks like he's changing >> things in a complex direction, so maybe it's starting to happen. We >> never did anything rigorous and general with the concepts in the old >> days, instead learned them by reading ethnographic case after >> ethnographic case, like lawyers learn legal reasoning. You'd think >> the field would notice the parallels. If anyone's interested, Lansing >> did an overview of complexity for the Annual Review of Anthropology a >> few years back, and I did a piece in Complexity that complexifies >> some ethnographic issues (We Have Met the Other and We're All >> Nonlinear) that's on my web page. >> >> And now, for something completely different, this week's Economist >> has a feature on evolutionary economics: >> http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7189617 >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> 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 >> <http://www.friam.org/> >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: winmail.dat >> Type: application/ms-tnef >> Size: 9780 bytes >> Desc: not available >> Url : > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060725/5fe098b1/attachment.bin >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Friam mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> >> >> End of Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 46 >> ************************************* > > > > ============================================================ > 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
