On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 07:58:35AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Russell Standish
>
> 1) It is a cruelty of nature to make the two IMHO most powerful thinkers
> (Peirce and Leibniz) to be the two most difficult to understand.
> I would not throw them out just yet.
I'm not. But until someone c
g the following content -
From: Russell Standish
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-10-15, 18:05:59
Subject: Re: Computational Secondness 1 (formerly Computational Autopoetics 1)
I'm more than happy for you to explore this, and report back when you
can explain it in terms other than
I'm more than happy for you to explore this, and report back when you
can explain it in terms other than the Peircean trinity. I never found
the Peircean classification to shed light or insight into
anything. YMMV though, of course!
I'm curious to know why you think autopoetic is misleading. My
cr
Hi Russell Standish
A self-organizing system is not what I proposed because
in such a system it is the output (Thirdness) that organizes
itself. And "autopoetics" is also apparently a misleading term.
I was seduced by its academic associations.
Instead, I see now that what I am proposing
4 matches
Mail list logo