Glen/Marcus-
On 10/4/13 9:30 AM, glen wrote:
But even when, say, buying a pinwheel in Chinatown or a US flag at a
big parade, if it's handed to you for free, it can take you awhile to
really determine whether it's worthless or if there's some joy hidden
somewhere inside.
I see your point (and about the bad journals), but there is something
unfortunate or even egotistical about defining the value of an idea or
artifact in terms of the attention or inattention of the individuals
that happen across it.
Marcus
I think this is (finally) the nut of the discussion? But isn't the
attention given to an artifact/idea precisely what gives it value in a
marketplace? I admit that the market is a fickle bitch sometimes and
some of the best ideas or artifacts likely get ignored forever. The very
phenomenon of artists (and sometimes writers) not being "discovered"
until after their death is one example.
Isn't the actual attention given something like the kinetic energy with
a latent attention it deserves being more like potential energy? This
is all relative of course... many ideas (and the artifacts grown from
them) are perhaps before their time or out of cultural context.
The work I have done in scientific collaboration was at least partly
about unlocking some of that potential by helping practitioners in
normally disjoint fields find common language and models to exchange
their best (or most latent?) ideas.
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
