Hm. I guess I'll say it at least one more time. I did NOT offer an onion as a model of complexity. You're using Goebbles on me, aren't you? Here:
I did NOT offer an onion as a model of complexity. I did NOT offer an onion as a model of complexity. I did NOT offer an onion as a model of complexity. I did NOT offer an onion as a model of complexity. 8^) On 06/12/2017 10:48 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > But Glen, if the onion was not a metaphor, then what was it? How did it > become relevant? A mongoose and a rutabaga are also things that can be > "sliced up, analysed..." etc, but you did not mention those. You did not > offer a rutabaga model of complexity; you offered an onion one. Is there > some OTHER "process of mind" other than metaphor-making that gets you from > complexity to onions? -- ☣ glen ============================================================ 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
