Steve, I think "wavering and curious" is the only sane way to be!
N Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology, Clark University ([email protected]) http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > [Original Message] > From: Steve Smith <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]> > Date: 6/7/2009 10:25:43 AM > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] quick question > > Nick - > > But surely we cannot reduce the strength of a triangle to the strength > > of its parts because the strength of a triangle depends on the > > ARRANGEMENT of those parts. And arrangement is not a property of any > > of the parts. > after my missive on Tolerancing and my claim that "Emergence" requires > "nonlinearity", I have to take a pause and accept that you may be > correct that the example of a triangle and it's strength might be > described as emergent. > > I hope that a "wise person" will weigh in here. I have to admit to > being left wavering and curious on this one. > > Good question Nick. > > - Steve ============================================================ 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
