Well, if psychedelics were fully legal, I'd use them openly ... if that's what you're asking. But my argument that individuals are an approximating simplification threads almost every thought I have that's even slightly related to plectics.
E.g. In about an hour, I'll be on a call discussing the utility of DAGs as models of probability distributions in interventional clinical trials. The video Jon posted talked ominously about reducing humans to variables. But the ominous tone is pure theater, adopted to brew fear (or hook to extant fear). We *are* variables. To whatever extent we can find clusters of variables that are more coherent than other clusters of variables, that's FANTASTIC. But it's harder than it might seem. The starting assumption should be that we are variables and the work is to derive the individual. It isn't be the other way around. On 3/29/21 11:55 AM, Steve Smith wrote: > Is your own refutation of "the individual" the personal experience you > have, or an intellectual abstraction to which you perhaps aspire to > experience? -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
