"It is SO evident to me that any conversation, even the most banal and proforma exchange of words, ... that I am blinded its self-evidentness, incapacitated by its obviousness, left without words."
That's what I used to say to you about consciousness and having an inner life. Frank On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:56 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve, > > > > Craven tho it might be, I am going to desert you on this field of battle. > It is SO evident to me that any conversation, even the most banal and > proforma exchange of words, is NOT a mere flapping of gums, that I am > blinded its self-evidentness, incapacitated by its obviousness, left > without words. > > > > You’re on your own, buddy. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > [email protected] > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Steve Smith > *Sent:* Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:39 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] millenarianism > > > > uǝlƃ ☣ wrote: > > The argument I stole from wherever wasn't that talking was a *form* of > grooming, but that it *replaced* grooming. Personally, I wouldn't go that > far. I'd argue that as soon as we learned to talk, talking became > yet-another-sensorimotor-behavior. I.e. talking is in the same category as > having sex, punching someone in the face, riding a tandem bicycle, combing > lice out of your kid's hair, etc. It's all the same thing. > > Well corrected... thanks. > > The gripe I have with most people is they reify their "thoughts", give too > much primacy to the idea of material-free interaction. Words are nothing > *but* flapping gums and banged keys. > > I will admit that having learned to type at a very early age (by oldSkool > standards...14) there is something *like* a visceral satisfaction in > banging the keys. When I have forced myself to write longhand (see the > anecdote about a first grade teacher breaking a ruler on the knuckles) it > can *also* be viscerally satisfying, especially when using a fountain pen > on quality paper. And yet I find "nothing more" hyperbolic. > > So, to Marcus' point, talking and punching are equally manipulative. And to > Nick's point, talking to oneself can be very satisfying, like shadow boxing. > But fighting an *alive* opponent is always more interesting. > > Touche' ! > > What about "dancing"? My limited experience with Tae Kwon Do peaked > during sparring which with the *right* opponent/partner felt more like > Dancing than Fighting. Similarly with fencing (foil only for me, no sabres > or broadswords). Neither felt choreographed. > > Some of our threads here feel more like squabbling than "dancing"... not > quite a melee (usually) even though there are some real free-for-all. > > I re-submit my previous question of the role/value/import of "an > audience/readership" participation. > > SS> In contrast on this (now bent) thread, Marcel Duchamp stated > (authoritatively?!): > > “All in all, the creative act is not performed by the artist alone; the > spectator brings the work in contact with the external world by deciphering > and interpreting its inner qualifications and thus adds his contribution to > the creative act,” > > SS> Many creatives (visual artists, writers, and more obviously performing > artists) have agreed with this... the audience "participation" if not > "response" is key to their "completion"... I don't know if this maps onto > "closure" in CS, but maybe. > > - Steve > > > > > > On 6/6/20 3:06 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > > Glen has suggested variously that he doesn't believe in communication, and > that in humans "dialog is a form of social grooming" (I stand prepared to be > corrected for mis-apprehending/stating Glen's positions). > > > > I'm inclined to agree with him somewhat, though I DO believe some of our > chatter is at least an *attempt to communicate*. So is that *all* we are > doing when we blather away here? Or perhaps just Bombastic Careening (nod to > Jon)? Mental Masturbation? Dominance Aggression? Random Neuromuscular > Spasms? > > > > - .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. > -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -.. > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > -- Frank Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
