Glen, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > That's closer I think. There's little point to agility for a little > > fish after it has been swallowed. All that helps then is making > > excuses... briefly. Agility only helps if you sense the > > 'disturbance' and avoid the attack entirely. Derivatives are long > > range indicators of out of model events approaching. > > No, there's much point to agility even if the little fish is > _eventually_ swallowed. Agility allows the little fish to avoid being > swallowed for a longer time than her clumsy siblings. More time means > more chances to mate, which is the whole point of the exercise. > > As for sensing the disturbance, agility helps no matter _when_ you sense > the disturbance. (You _always_ sense the disturbance, even if it's only > after the teeth sink into your flesh.) The point of being agile is to > allow you a larger window and more options between the time of sensing > the disturbance and your subsequent action.
[ph] why make it so complicated? You don't need to explain why it's good to survive. It's good to survive. The agility only makes a difference in that *before* being swallowed, when you have an ability to respond to the information of *approaching danger*. No info, no avoidance of danger. > The larger point is that the best methods for handling potentially > catastrophic change derive from a tight feedback loop with one's > environment. Abstraction is the enemy. Embeddedness and high > interactivity are key. Agility is an ability that comes from being > deeply embedded in the context. > [ph] Yes, the apparent reason people are constantly walking blindly into conflict is a lack of information on it's approach. The clear evidence, like the whole environmental movement spending 30 years promoting energy solutions that would trigger a world food crisis, is that we are missing the signals of approaching danger. We read 'disturbances in the force' (i.e. alien derivatives like diminishing returns) very skillfully in one circumstance and miss them entirely in others. We constantly walk smack into trouble because we do something that selectively blocks that kind of information. The evidence seems to closely fit the 'functional fixation' of using fixed representations for changing things in our models. > It's true that abstraction allows one to estimate long-range patterns > and long-term trends. But commitment to those abstract patterns and > trends does NOT help one survive potentially catastrophic change. It > can only help one avoid such change. And when the change is waaaay too > big to avoid? Well, then agility is the key. [ph] again, agility only helps avoid the catastrophe *before* the catastrophe. Here you're saying it mainly helps after, and that seems to be incorrect. Phil > > -- > glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com > There is nothing as permanent as a temporary government program. -- > Milton Friedman > > > ============================================================ > 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
