Groan. What possible gain will come of trying to add yet more baggage to that already overloaded, mythical, magical "emergence" word by trying to force-fit the process of knitting a sweater on to it?
--Doug On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:08 AM, ERIC P. CHARLES <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings, > This morning, I saw an interesting emergence problem on a children's > television show, and thought I would send a query to the group. > > As is prone to happen, a character received a knitted sweater, which > promptly caught on something and began to unravel. By the time they noticed > it was just one long string. They then followed the string back, ending up > with a large ball of string. They had the string, which is all the sweater > was; but of course, they did not in any reasonable sense have "the sweater". > > > I was wondering how the different authors in the book would describe this > situation. In particular, it would seem natural to say that the string isn't > the sweater BECAUSE the sweater is "emergent". > > Hopefully that example is of interest to more than just me, > > Eric > > P.S. Look Nick, I maintained your thread dominance request! > > = >
============================================================ 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
