Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

Fine with me. Reminds me of https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thripple, and for some reason marshmallows also (perhaps by way of "ripple"?). -Arlo James Barnes FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St.

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

/   From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Arlo Barnes Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 3:13 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Arlo Barnes Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 3:13 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots On Fri,

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > a sign IS a thrupple .. or whatever that lovely word is A 3-tuple? I believe "tuple" itself is just a generalisation of "double, triple, quadruple, quintuple, [...]", with "singleton" being the odd one (pun?

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

nk.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -Original Message- From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 11:19 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roo

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

On 03/04/2016 11:17 AM, Russ Abbott wrote: All that is much to sophisticated for me. I don't have a theory or a model (e.g., in terms of interpreters) for how the mind works. Heh, you claim it's too sophisticated and that you don't have a theory or a model for how the mind works, yet you

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

All that is much to sophisticated for me. I don't have a theory or a model (e.g., in terms of interpreters) for how the mind works. This all started as a discussion of subjective behavior. It has drifted into a discussion of thinking more generally -- and in particular thinking about

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

On 03/04/2016 10:27 AM, Russ Abbott wrote: I must have missed the message where you talked about the 3-tuple and don't understand what you mean that a sign is one of 3 objects in a 3-tuple and why it matters. Nick talked about a sign; I was distinguishing a sign from its referent -- which you do

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

I must have missed the message where you talked about the 3-tuple and don't understand what you mean that a sign is one of 3 objects in a 3-tuple and why it matters. Nick talked about a sign; I was distinguishing a sign from its referent -- which you do too. I also said the reference is often a

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

On 03/03/2016 11:16 PM, Russ Abbott wrote: I find myself confused about what you mean when you say they are "signs that stand in a rigorous, systematic, and extensively confirmed way to ... mathematical relationships". A sign is not (in your view) a thing (other than itself) is it? I would have

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

03, 2016 10:09 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots Since Glen missed the square root analogy, I'd like to repeat it. Nick and Eric seem to be saying that there is no such thing as subj

Re: [FRIAM] Subjectivity and square roots

Since Glen missed the square root analogy, I'd like to repeat it. Nick and Eric seem to be saying that there is no such thing as subjective experience since only things that can be seen and touched are real. I said that such a position seems to deny the existence of the square root of two. One