Dave West supports Nick. Two proper nouns and such a rich metaphor.
davew On Thu, Mar 28, 2019, at 1:20 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > Steve, ‘n all, > > Just to be cranky, I want to remind everybody that ALL language use, except > perhaps tautological expressions, is metaphorical. So then, the question is > not, “Is this a metaphor”, but what kind of a metaphor is it and is it > pernicious. My own view is that in any “tense” conversation – one in which > the parties feel the words really matter – it behooves a metaphor-user to > define the limits of the metaphor. So, for instance, much mischief has arisen > in evolutionary biology from a failure of theorists to define the limits of > their use of such metaphors as “natural selection” and “ adaptation”. When > limits are defined, the surplus meaning of a metaphor is separated into two > parts, initially, that which the metaphor-user embraces and that which s/he > disclaims. The embraced part goes on to become the positive heuristic of the > metaphor, the “wet edge” along which science develops. The disclaimed part, > must be further divided into that which was legitimately [logically] > disclaimed and that which was disclaimed fraudulently. For instance, when > sociobiologists use the notion of selfish gene, they may legitimately > disclaim the idea that genes consciously choose between self-regarding and > other-regarding options, but they cannot legitimately disclaim the idea that > a gene has the power to make any choice but the self-regarding one And that > idea is patently false. Genes do not make choices, they ARE choices and the > choice is made at the level of the phenotype or at the level of the > population, depending on how one thinks about the matter. So the metaphor > ‘selfish gene’ is pernicious in evolutionary biology, because it creates > confusion on the very point that it purports to clarify – the level at which > differential replication operates to generate long term phenotypic change in > a population. > > Dave West, I expect you to support me in this. > > Nick > > PS – Is anybody on this list (among the handful that have gotten this far in > this post) familiar with the work of Douglas Walton? He seems perhaps to have > written a lot about misunderstandings in AI systems … i.e., how does Siri > know what we mean? I came to this work through my interest in abduction, > which may be described as the process by which we identify (ascribe meaning > to?) experiences. Walton seems to suggest that you-guys are way ahead of the > rest of us on the process of meaning ascription, and we all should go to > school with you. Please tell me where and when you offer the class. > -N > > 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:* Friday, March 08, 2019 10:03 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] excess meaning alert? (was, Re: are we how we behave?) > > Lee - >> Steve writes in relevant part: >> >>> My position is that I favor each and every one of us taking whatever >>> responsibility for understanding our own "convex hull" of >>> capability/knowledge/intuition as we are capable of and "managing" it to >>> the best of our ability. >> >> The quotation marks around the phrase 'convex hull' and the word >> 'managing' presumably signal that they are being used non-literally, and >> (I guess) metaphorically. > Thanks for asking (I think). > I was responding to Roger's use of the term which I took to mean specifically > the geometric "surface" known as a *Pareto Frontier > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency#Pareto_frontier> *which is > essentially a (hyper)surface (line in 2D) which describes (geometrically a > containing space of) the collection of optimal solutions in a > high-dimensional trade space. It *is* equivalent to the *Convex Hull * > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convex_hull#Convex_hull_of_a_finite_point_set>problem > in geometry, but carries an implication for multi-objective optimization. >> I would particularly like Steve, if he is >> willing, to delve into the intended metaphor in the first case. On the >> one hand, lots of my work uses more or less geometry; on the other, in >> lots of my other work I use metaphor; and I even think and write about >> metaphor. So it's likely that I'm taking the metaphor more seriously than >> intended. > I do believe that studying the Wikipedia articles linked above will lead to a > detailed explication of what I was referring to. > I will also accept responsibility for my irresponsible use of ' " ' marks. > For me, it is often a shorthand for indicating that the term within the > quotes is a "reserved term" (*Reserved Term*) from some *Specialized Lexicon* > which I trust the reader is either familiar with or (with my hint) recognizes > as being a term with specific, intentional and likely obscure (to the casual > reader) but non-trivial meaning. In other words, I'm trying to indicate that > it is a very specifically *Loaded Word* (or phrase). >> With that disclaimer: in the technical contexts I'm familiar with, to pass >> from something X to the convex hull of X has the effect of (1) 'filling in >> holes in X', in a well-defined manner that is (2) as economical as >> possible and (3) (therefore) unique. Which (if any) of those properties >> are reflected, and how, in the case that X is our >> "capability/knowledge/intuition"? ... I could ramble on a lot more but >> will start with that. > And I believe this does align with *Convex Hull* as used above... the > specific relevance to multi-objective optimization would require reference to > *Pareto Frontier"*or *Pareto Surface *which (as Wikipedia elaborates well) > originated in economic theory but is relevant to any multi-objective > optimization problem. > It could be noted that I had to go back and edit out yet more egregious uses > of ' " ' in this text, using *Capitalized Italics* in it's place. I don't > know if that is ideal, but generally that would be my preferred typographical > indication of a *Reserved Term* from a *Specialized Lexicon*. I will try to > be more consistent in the future, and am open to being schooled on a more > proper typographical (within the realm of text consisting of the basic roman > alphabet and italics/bold formatting) indication. > Orthogonal to my orthographic transgressions, I admit also to playing fast > and loose WITH metaphor, sometimes being whimsical about it, other times > using it in a very intentional and specific way as rigid (in some cases) as a > (complex) formal analogy. > I would claim (following Lakoff and Nunez in _Where Mathematics Comes From_ ) > that all metaphors ultimately ground in human sensations provided by our > embodiment. I also work on the operational assumption the our primary mode of > understanding is via (conceptual) metaphor (Lakoff & Johnson _Metaphors we > Live by_)... metaphor stacked on top of metaphor which is grounded in our > embodied sensuality. Near the bottom of that stack we often find metaphorical > *Source Domains* (or our *Image Donor*) from geometry. > In closing, to try to tie these two points together, my *Reserved Terms*, > formerly (sloppily) indicated by "scare quotes" (*Scare Quotes*?) may be from > a *Specialized Lexicon* derived from a specific (common or obscure) > *Metaphorical Source Domain. * > I believe that it is *more common* in *Internet Culture* to reserve *Scare > Quotes* for sarcasm or derision, but I may not have that quite right? > - Steve > PS. I am given to bracketing words I intend to be read as *emboldened* with > '*'s which seem to often be rendered exactly that way. I use > preceding/following '_' underscore marks to indicate _Underlined Text_ which > does NOT seem to be rendered that way often. And I am erratic in my use of > *bold* and CAPS for simple emphasis. Also open to some improved/alternative > conventions and promise to *TRY* to be more consistent. > > ============================================================ > 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 > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >
============================================================ 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 archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
