Glen,
See Larding re science. Re Renee: If she were the Friam Health Officer, would she suspend our weekly meeting of septuagenarians in a college dining hall? For her information, there are exactly zero diagnosed cases of the virus in NM at the moment. I agree with you. It’s certainly not death I fear. Its that moment when Penny and I are crawling to the front door to gnaw at boxes of sugar frosted flakes that the fire department has left at our door. That moment I fear. N Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University [email protected] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of u?l? ? Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 11:23 AM To: FriAM <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Pragmaticism and puritanism First, I don't disagree fundamentally with your definition of science. Second, I *disagree* that the kind of "verbal analysis and metaphorical 'play'" you and Dave have been doing is part of what people do when they do good science. What you've been doing is a part of being human, yes. And humans do science. So, fine. But correlation is not causation. These types of conversations have NOT been demonstrated as necessary for good science. My guess is that *most* scientists never engage in this sort of conversation ... heck, I'd guess most people never engage in this sort of conversation. I've had lots of conversations like these while *drinking* after the day is done (either working with scientists or at conferences). But it's not at all obvious that there's a causal connection between having these conversations and doing good work. Many of my scientist friends do excellent work, but bail on the pub-philosophy because they want to go home to their spouses and kids ... good science sans conversations about unicorns. Now, you could make an argument that this type of conversation helps facilitate the science ... or makes the science better, more complete, more efficient, or whatever. But, I'd suggest, to be credible, you'd have to eat your own dog food and *demonstrate* that these types of conversations do that. [NST===>] No, no, Glen. Be fair. That’s OUR dogfood I would be eating. So the question would be, Does a science move more slowly or more rapidly toward convergence on enduring understandings with or without logical understandings? Can philosophers point to cases where they have clearly contributed to development and/or dissemination of empirical knowledge? I know that many philosophers of science have been dubious about it. . I would quickly cite Peirce as an example given that his focus on the practicial consequences of concepts (their consequences in practice) helped to move behavioral sciences on during subsequent 50 years. Somebody must of made that case. I will shake some bushes. Third, we're all OK up here re: the virus. Renee', being a nurse, has access to information that seems a little more sedate and professional than I've seen from other sources. I'm at risk because my immune system is compromised. I'll catch it, I'm sure, because I'm not going to change my behavior at all. I eat out a lot ... and I eat mostly salad, carrying whatever nastiness was growing on the hands of all the people who brought it from the dirt to my table. But if my cancer taught me anything, it's that death is nothing to be afraid of. I'm more worried about my neighbors. They're so afraid ... and they don't even seem to know what they're afraid of. So I'm doing my best to talk about hand washing and virus evolution every chance I get. On 3/11/20 9:28 AM, <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] wrote: > I stipulate that IF the experiences produced by psychedelics are sciencible, > then they are science. What we call "SCIENCE" is just a formalization and > distillation of broader patterns of analysis and exploration that have proven > to be more successful, "i.e., science". It is that broader pattern for > which I claim privilege. If there are patterns in experience, then this is > the way to find them. If this is NOT the way to find patterns in experience, > then it is not science. To the extent that the prejudices and practices of > any group of scientists, myself included, are inconsistent with science, as > understood above, they are probably NOT science, no matter who should claim > otherwise. > > I hope that you stipulate that the kind of verbal analysis and metaphorical > "play" that we have been engaging in during this discussion is a PART of what > people do when they do good science. For my part, I stipulate that to pursue > these activities to the exclusion of gathering data, either directly or > indirectly, is to fetishize philosophy and make a mockery of science. Bit > -- to allow myself a bit of agism-- it's what old people can do, or, perhaps, > less grandiosely, it's what I can do right now. And as long as I am tied to > a community of inquiry -- that would be the rest of you, right -- I feel that > I am pursuing science while doing it. To the extent that I have fended off > empirical data, I am a bad old bugger and should be horsewhipped. In my > defense, however, before you horsewhip me, let me say that I have tried to > get clear, before I process the data on what happens when I take drugs, on > the question of how that information is going to be worked into our > scientific discussion, given that I perceive that there is some risk > involved. > > On another matter, Glen, how are you doing with, what ate you doing about, > the covid19?. A couple of weeks ago, I tried to get my wife to pack up and > make a run for the pristine isolation of the Mosquito Infested Swamp, > pleading great age and prior conditions. Nothin' doin'. So, now, I think, > we are stuck. I can think of worse places to be stuck than santa fe, but I > hate feeling stuck, even in paradise. -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ 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> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> 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
