I second Nick's comment.

-- Russ A



On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Nicholas Thompson <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Rikus,
>
> I am grateful for your commentary.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
> Clark University ([email protected])
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/<http://home.earthlink.net/%7Enickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
>
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Rikus Combrinck <[email protected]>
> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> [email protected]>
> > Date: 10/13/2009 5:13:56 AM
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Criticism and feedback (was Re: Theory and practice)
> >
> > I'm comfortable with detailed criticism and familiar with the strange
> > activity patterns of online forums.  What disturbed me was the notion
> that
> > knowledge, discussion or inquiry without immediate, direct application is
> > undesirable.  I find such a stance shortsighted, to say the least, and
> was
> > taken aback that it seemed to be able to survive in intelligent,
> educated,
> > experienced minds.  Human knowledge is a vast web that only occasionally
> > supports application, but it needs the whole web (well, most of it) to
> carry
> > the weight of need and use in such instances.  Frequently, it's
> impossible
> > to tell ahead of time which strands may take up the weight years later.
> >
> > I lumped a post of yours (Glen) with some others in my rant, because it
> > seemed to support said stance by casting the unused as unreal, and hence
> --
> > in my mind, at the time -- unsuitable for discussion.  That was probably
> an
> > unfair interpretation.
> >
> > Steve mentions good-natured ribbing among friends; this is valid and I'm
> > aware that a large part of the FRIAM membership has face-to-face
> interaction
> > and enjoys a consequent sense of social awareness and cohesion that may
> cast
> > conversations in a different light.  I should probably be more sensitive
> to
> > this.
> >
> > No need for saccharine, only respect for a sincere desire to know, to
> > understand and to share insight.  It underpins all human achievement and
> it
> > riles me to see it trivialised.
> >
> > Having said that, it is also true that capable minds and the bandwidth
> that
> > connects them are valuable resources.  I acknowledge that signal-to-noise
> > ratio and opportunity cost become relevant at some point and that opinion
> on
> > optimal focus, volume and quality may differ.
> >
> > Rikus
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > From: "glen e. p. ropella" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 7:22 PM
> > To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group"
> <[email protected]>
> > Subject: [FRIAM] Criticism and feedback (was Re: Theory and practice)
> >
> > Thus spake Rikus Combrinck circa 09-10-11 01:53 PM:
> > > What the hell? [...]
> > > If there is the possibility of
> > > additional insight, any insight, how about some applause when people
> spend
> > > their own resources to advance their understanding, and share it for
> free
> > > as
> > > they go!
> >
> > Well, the thing you might be missing is that detailed criticism _is_
> > applause in scientific circles.  Online media are difficult to
> > understand.  Detailed criticism is usually a sign of _respect_ and
> > should be interpreted as an "atta boy".  But ignoring someone's post is
> > NOT a secret message for that person to stop contributing.  Sometimes,
> > the impact of a post is quite large even if there is no response.  These
> > things are occult.  But one thing is for sure, if a person takes the
> > time to actually read and respond to what you've written, then it is a
> > sign of RESPECT, even if (or perhaps especially if) the response is very
> > critical.
> >
> > Now, while I agree that self-indulgent mocking in the form of "Oh no,
> > not again", without any detailed criticism is bad form (because it's
> > mostly useless), I don't think we need saccharine back-patting.  But
> > then again, I've been accused of total failure in my attempts to
> > encourage people after doing a good job. ;-)  So, what do I know?
> >
> > --
> > glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://agent-based-modeling.com
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > 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

Reply via email to