Oh I still have to finish my 2020 income tax too. I really don't like this
paperwork :-(-J.
-------- Original message --------From: [email protected] Date: 9/11/21
20:06 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
<[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wimberly's Conjecture Nick’s theory:
“Reduce” consciousness to higher levels of material organization. Or, when he
is being a ferocious monist, to an experience that is labeled as an experience
of another experience. Nick’s task for today: Finish his 2020 income tax.
Ugh N Nick
[email protected]https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From:
Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Marcus DanielsSent: Saturday,
September 11, 2021 1:45 PMTo: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <[email protected]>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wimberly's Conjecture Here’s what
I think: Scientists who talk about consciousness being non-computable are not
scientists. From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jochen
FrommSent: Saturday, September 11, 2021 10:33 AMTo: The Friday Morning Applied
Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wimberly's
Conjecture I am looking forward to hear Nick's theory about it. None of the
recent books is completely convincing:+ “Rethinking Consciousness: A Scientific
Theory of Subjective Experience” by Michael Graziano+ “The Feeling of Life
Itself: Why Consciousness Is Widespread but Can’t Be Computed" by Christof
Koch+ “Out of My Head: On the Trail of Consciousness" by Tim Parks
https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/do-we-have-minds-of-our-own -J.
-------- Original message --------From: Marcus Daniels <[email protected]>
Date: 9/11/21 18:53 (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wimberly's Conjecture
It’s physical or it is not. What’s it gonna be? From: Friam
<[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jochen FrommSent: Saturday, September
11, 2021 9:51 AMTo: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
<[email protected]>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wimberly's Conjecture Consciousness has
multiple meanings. What does it mean in Wimberly's conjecture, the thing that
flickers to life when you wake up in the morning, or the moment when you
consider yourself to be you, or the part of the mind which you are aware of but
which is not the one driving the boat (according to David Eagleman) ? -J.
-------- Original message --------From: [email protected] Date: 9/11/21
17:14 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
<[email protected]> Subject: [FRIAM] Wimberly's Conjecture> Wimberly's
Conjecture: There is no correct, reductionist explanation of
consciousness.Well, depends on what you mean by reduction. If you limit
reduction to accounts in terms of events at lower levels or organization, then
I absolutely agree, and we can stop arguing about this for ever. How ‘bout
that? Nick
[email protected]https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From:
Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Frank WimberlySent: Friday,
September 10, 2021 4:18 PMTo: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <[email protected]>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur 😁---Frank C. Wimberly140
Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505505 670-9918Santa Fe, NM On Fri, Sep 10,
2021, 1:22 PM Marcus Daniels <[email protected]> wrote:I should have known
to hide the drugs from the addicts. -----Original Message-----From: Friam
<[email protected]> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$Sent: Friday, September 10,
2021 12:16 PMTo: [email protected]: Re: [FRIAM] gen'furIt's your fault
for focusing on reading ability instead of some less subjective trait. Had you
focused on, say, tool use
<https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/en/horizon-magazine/our-intelligent-ancestor-neanderthal>
or somesuch, then we may not have gone there. ... Aaaaa, who am I kidding? We
always go there. On 9/10/21 12:06 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:> How did we get
started on consciousness again? The thread started with some snark about the
power of GWAS associations..> > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]>
*On Behalf Of *Frank > Wimberly> *Sent:* Friday, September 10, 2021 11:56 AM>
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]>>
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur> > > > Wimberly's Conjecture: There is no
correct, reductionist explanation of consciousness.> > ---> Frank C. Wimberly>
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,> Santa Fe, NM 87505> > 505 670-9918> Santa Fe, NM> > > >
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 11:44 AM uǝlƃ ☤>$ <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:> > It's no more profound than any
other multi-order composition. It's part of the work we have to do for
mechanistic modeling of higher order constructs. What galls me is that we can
talk about it so much without discussing the mechanisms of construction.> >
The details of composing from genes, through physiological structures, through
interoception, to very high order attributes like "reading ability" are
interesting, regardless of any profundity. But some of us need to be reminded
of how the details build the narrative. Like Magic Eye pictures, the Necker
cube, or the lady/vase thing, what might seem banal without the larger frame
can seem profound when the discourse is enlarged ... when it all snaps into
place.> > > On 9/10/21 10:25 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:> > Fine, the
goal is some composition of functions and it is all interdependent. > >>
> Sure. Of course. Why is this so profound to y’all? > >> > >
>> > *From:* Friam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> *On Behalf Of *[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> > *Sent:* Friday, September 10, 2021
10:20 AM> > *To:* 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM]
gen'fur> >> > > >> > Which takes us back to thermostats,
intentionality, intensional inexistence, Sober’s epiphomenator, spandrels, and
Lorenz’s law: The goal is never the function. If you build a bird that
measures competing male robins in terms of “brown stick with red fluff” you
eventually get an ethologist who gets that bird to attack by providing only
brown sticks with red fluff. > >> > > >> > See. It’s all
connected.> >> > > >> > Nick> >> > > >> >
Nick Thompson> >> > [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> >> >
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>>> >> > > >> >
*From:* Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> *On
Behalf Of *Steve Smith> > *Sent:* Friday, September 10, 2021 12:30 PM>
> *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur> >> >
> >> > Sometimes all you need is a good aphorism> >> >
https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law
<https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law>
<https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law
<https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law>>> >> > or maybe boost it
up with a cartoon> >> > https://sketchplanations.com/
<https://sketchplanations.com/> <https://sketchplanations.com/
<https://sketchplanations.com/>>> >> > I can't help but wonder if
there's an analog of Goodhart's law lurking, here.> >> > > >>
> > >> > On September 9, 2021 2:31:39 PM PDT, Marcus
Daniels <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:> >>
> Or they are reprogramming their people to be smarter!> >> >
(Actually, deCODE is owned by Amgen now.)> >> > > >>
> Selection is already occurring, so it isn't as if this is some
sci-fi thing.> >> > > >> >
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/
<https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/>
<https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/
<https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/>>>
>> > -----Original Message-----> >> > From:
Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf
Of David Eric Smith> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021
2:12 PM> >> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> >> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur>
>> > > >> > Aha! This is why Iceland has the
highest per-capita fraction of published authors in the world. I had assumed
it was the weather….> >> > > >> > On Sep
10, 2021, at 2:17 AM, Marcus Daniels <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:> >> > > >> >
That can be screened as well with a large population-wide survey
such has been done in the UK or Iceland.> >> > Of course,
it is unlikely that complex behaviors will be governed by isolated mutations,
so the task is to look for highly predictive motifs (e.g. regular expressions).
> >> > > >> > -----Original
Message-----> >> > From: Friam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$> >> >
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 10:12 AM> >> > To:
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> >> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM]
gen'fur> >> > > >> > Ha! Now you're
trolling. The answer is: "because the sites that generate reading ability (or
whatever) *also* generate other 'abilities'", with "abilities" in scare quotes
because many abilities are considered bad ... like the ability of a pimply
faced white dude to shoot up a church or blow up a federal building.> >>
> > >> > In addition to polyphenism, there's
robustness. If more than 1 site generates the same functional ability
(reading), then do we write them all? ... just one of them? ... a
probabilistically predictive handful of them?> >> > >
>> > On 9/9/21 10:00 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:> >> >
So find the sites that correspond to reading ability, or whatever,
and WRITE them. > >> > > >> >
-----Original Message-----> >> > From: Friam
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf
Of u?l? ?>$> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021
9:51 AM> >> > To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> >> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM]
gen'fur> >> > > >> > I was
alerted to this article this morning:> >> > > >>
> Can Progressives Be Convinced That Genetics Matters?>
>> >
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con
<https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con>
<https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con
<https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con>>>
>> > v> >> >
inced-that-genetics-matters> >> > > >> >
It should delight those amongst us who rant about the "woke". 8^D But
it dovetails nicely with the fraught concept of equality in the other thread.>
>> > > >> > Coincidentally,
also on 9/6, the BIAPT announced their early career prize winner Emily
McTernan:> >> >
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo
<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo>
<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo
<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo>>>
>> > rpoliticalthought.ac.uk
<http://rpoliticalthought.ac.uk>%2fbiapt-2021-early-care&c=E,1,Je9MVNdO8lpJQOd>
>> >
6fZwUNe-4z5yuFq0upxNIzMBFjmLFh_h5a63ueVVpd8lkEdWeUx5Xx1RaoPg3T5Ph8YlG> >>
> 0558qqHLZD8-DKeBPEC3YYM,&typo=1> >> >
er-prize-winner-dr-emily-mcternan/> >> > > >>
> "In her forthcoming monograph, Dr McTernan develops her work
on social equality further, to advance a pioneering conceptual account – and
robust normative defence – of the phenomenon of ‘taking offence’. Therein,
McTernan contends, we should understand taking offence, under appropriate
conditions, as a civic virtue rather than a vice, as an emotion that embodies
the resistance of social inequalities within a community."> >> >
> >> > > >> > On
9/8/21 8:06 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:> >> > From
about a cancer rate of 10% (without mutation) to 50% (with) but it depends on
the BRCA variant.> >> > > >> >
https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca>
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca>>> >>
> n> >> > c> >> >
er.htm> >> >
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_c
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_c>
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm>>>
>> > a
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm>>>
>> > n
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm>>>
>> > cer.htm>
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm
<https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm>>>
>> > > >> > On
Sep 8, 2021, at 4:07 PM, Frank Wimberly <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:> >> > >
>> > > >> > Is
the Braca gene that little correlated with breast cancer?> >> >
> >> > ---> >> >
Frank C. Wimberly> >> > 140
Calle Ojo Feliz,> >> > Santa Fe, NM 87505>
>> > > >> > 505
670-9918> >> > Santa Fe, NM> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Sep 8, 2021,
4:57 PM Marcus Daniels <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:> >>
> > >> > Yeah, it
is hard to get excited about “unusual” variance. Modern> >> >
classification algorithms like gradient boosting make it
possible> >> > to predict phenotypes, and to me
that is a lot more interesting> >> > (and still
possible to deconstruct).____> >> > > >>
> __ __> >> > >
>> > *From:* Friam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles> >> >
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 8, 2021 3:53 PM> >>
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>>> >> >
*Subject:* [FRIAM] gen'fur____> >> > > >>
> __ __> >> > >
>> > Gen'fur this, gen'fur that... and also
the realities of biological complexity....--☤>$ uǝlƃ- .... . -..-. . -. -..
-..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservZoom
Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-COMIC
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/-
.... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .FRIAM Applied Complexity
Group listservZoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriamun/subscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-COMIC
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
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/
