Eric,
I like the example. Thank you.
Doug
I stipulate that you don't like this topic. But wait a minute! You responded
to the thread!? That's odd!
If interested, the reading this week is the aforementioned Bedau.
Best,
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas Roberts
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: 9/25/2009 8:22:04 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Inquiry to Emergence Group
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
