Steve, 

 

What do you want to call “levels of inclusion”?  What sorts of levels are 
trophic levels?  

 

What is preventing us from agreeing that complexity is just the inclusion of 
one system within another?

 

I know it takes a way the magic to be so straightforward, but other than you 
love of mystery, what is wrong with that definition? 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 3:46 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] tools, trollers, and language

 

At the risk of another discursion:

I think I just realized what I've been (almost) seeing of value in all this 
back and forth:

1.      I (and Nick) heard Glen's invocation of the Onion as an attempt to 
explicate a useful difference between levels and layers in the understanding of 
Complexity Babble (Talk/Science/Math/???).  I think he meant only to try to 
distinguish the two from one another and explicate their differences 
irrespective of the near dead horse we were working over at the time.  I think 
this might be the totality of the misunderstanding.
2.      I'm always looking for form/function dualities.  In the onion, the form 
(layers) follows a certain functional/behavioural path (cyclical growth).   I 
don't even know how to find "levels" in the a *hierarchical* sense or otherwise 
in an onion... maybe if we look at the cross section (as Glen suggested) and 
see *strata* (from the source (domain) of geological deposition and erosive or 
shearing exposure?) and then consider drilling a mine shaft into said strata 
which is more suggestive of the term "levels"?   

Mumble,

 - Steve

 

On 6/12/17 1:28 PM, glen ☣ wrote:

 
Sorry.  I didn't mean anything nefarious with the "repeat a lie often enough" 
thing.
 
I introduced an onion as an example of a thing, in the real world, that you can 
look at in terms of levels or layers.  And looking at it in terms of layers 
produces something different (and presumably more "natural") than looking at it 
in terms of levels.
 
 
 
On 06/12/2017 12:17 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Look, Glen.  I may be old.  I may be stupid.  I may be distracted.  I am 
certainly out of my depth.  This discussion, which fascinates me, is happening 
at a very inopportune  time for me, so I am admittedly not able to invest as 
much attention on it as it deserves and I would like.  And the discussion is 
going very fast, with answers falling all over other answers.   But I am NOT 
ill-willed or guileful.   And I am certainly not Goebbels. Good LORD!   Try, 
whatever evidence to the contrary I may seem to present, to assume that I am 
basically an honest person, and that we share an interest in getting somewhere. 
 AND -- the hard part -- I recognize that if we ARE to get anywhere, 
everybody's thinking -- including my own -- is going to have to change. 
 
 
 
OK.  So, with all that in mind.  Say again, would you please, what the onion 
was doing in the discussion.  Just to recap from my point of view, I think the 
slice of an onion is a cross section.  The notion of a cross-section plays an 
important role in Holt's Concept of Consciousness, which describes anybody's 
consciousness as a cross section cut through the world by that person's 
behavior.  My consciousness is just those features of the world to which I 
respond.  When we slice an onion the structure revealed says something about 
BOTH the onion and about us, the slicer.  The cross section differs not only 
from onion to onion but because of how it was sliced. 
 
 
 
Now NONE of this has anything to do with what I mean by "levels" , which 
invokes an organizational metaphor.  I mean, hierarchical levels.  I suspect it 
will be almost impossible to talk about complexity without a language that 
includes hierarchical levels.  Remember, we got into this because I offered a 
definition of a complex system as a system made up of other systems.  So, on my 
account, an onion IS a complex system because it is a system of plants, each 
wrapped around another.  

 

 

============================================================
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

Reply via email to