Excellent! Such credit tracking is something I've always wished I were 
competent at. I look at all these publications of people I respect and see 
hundreds of items in the references and my imagination runs wild with how much 
work they had to do to track down where any given idea came from. Renee's fond 
of exclamations like "They're so talented!" when watching some musician or 
somesuch (e.g. this guy https://youtu.be/4LFcNd-psRA). My refrain consists of 
"Talent is an illusion. What you see is the result of a ton of work." It's a 
song we sing a lot. I'll gladly cop to being lazy. >8^D

I noticed that Jon hid (too well) his answer to Dave's comment about modes of 
knowledge acquisition. Assuming I'm not imputing it, the idea is that these 
modes are not necessarily isolated or disjoint, and possibly not even 
countable. Each agent could comprise 1 mode or a set of modes. But the 
important part comes down to the idea that the agent (and/or its modes) derives 
from the world. So, it takes "context matters" to an extreme. The very fact 
that Dave identifies 5 "ways of knowing" should be derivable from the world (in 
particular, the slice of the world Dave's experienced). Ontologically, if the 
world were something other than what it is, an agent like Dave might identify 
only 1 or hundreds of modes instead of 5. Epistemologically, a different agent 
might identify 4 or 6 ways of knowing with or without overlap of Dave's 5. If 
Dave laments the (apparent) fact that everyone's become a scientismist, it may 
be because the world is expressing scientism through the agents it produces.

To me, the issue boils down to the expressive power of the mode. My favorite 
meta-mathematician is Raymond Smullyan, who competently wrote on all sorts of 
topics, including something akin to panpsychism. Are his explorations of 
circularity in logic the same or a different mode from his rejection of 
traditional Christianity because Hell is unchristian? I have no idea. But it 
should be clear that Smullyan is both a product of his environment and an 
encapsulation of some sort of spark/twitch that differs from most of us. Which 
came first? The egg, of course.

On 4/27/20 1:43 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> I call Twitch, which someone (on this list) pointed out to me was discussed 
>> in Warren's All the King's Men, arguably my favorite novel.
> 
> 
> It was I.  My narcissism requires that I receive the recognition I deserve.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... 
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Reply via email to