glen wrote:
I love that we're sticking to the thread, but in a hermeneutic way.
I don't know if my focusing on this tangent is hermeneutic but here I am
bending the bend I suppose?
Steve's use of "conceit" often confuses me. If I replace it with
"controlling idea" ... or, better, "occult controlling idea", then it
seems like agency is *the* conceit of our modern times. Framing one's
inability to compute as a moral failing feels akin to blaming the
victim. But what choice do we have? We absolutely must, and always do,
blame the victim. Right? If you're aphantasic, then it's clearly
because you're too lazy to put in the effort.
I think you captured a key connotation I *often* intend in my use of
"conceit" here... and I *do* credit you with A) often "putting in the
effort" whilst also B) cutting your losses - when it comes to trying to
untangle my convolutions (or is it doconvolving my tangles?)
To the point I think (imagine/project) your are making here, I
definitely want to *own* "controlling idea" in my usage and "occult" is
a significant useful modifier, though perhaps more in the sense of an
*open secret*... as if it is a shared, agreed-upon lacuna (e.g.
emperors new threads)?
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ...
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
