...@shaw.ca
-Original Message-
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: May 18, 2010 12:19 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress, Beep Beep Beep
...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: May 18, 2010 12:19 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress, Beep Beep Beep
Victoria / Tory -
IT SEEMS to ME
Steve, Vlad and the rest of ya,
that barring an INPERSON
...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Nicholas Thompson
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2010 9:30 PM
To: Russell Gonnering
Cc: friam@redfish.com
Subject: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Russ,
It is my deepest belief that if our country is to survived, people who
disagree need to learn to argue
...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Chris Feola
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 10:21 AM
To: nickthomp...@earthlink.net; 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Hey Nick,
I'm a libertarian; I hope you don't mind
]
[Original Message]
From: Chris Feola ch...@nextpression.com
To: nickthomp...@earthlink.net; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 5/17/2010 9:21:00 AM
Subject: RE: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Hey Nick,
I'm a libertarian; I hope you don't
...@earthlink.net
Date: 5/17/2010 9:24:53 AM
Subject: RE: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Sorry; brain cramp. 2nd sentence should read: it's that EVERYONE gets
that
corporations operate on SELFISH principles not special principles.
cjf
Christopher J. Feola
President, nextPression
Follow
: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Chris,
Thanks. See my last rather garbled note about the fact that treating
coporate vs government power as a zero-sum game might be a serious thinking
error. We all seem to fear most corporate AND government power. That is a
huge point to agree
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-17 09:08 AM:
We all seem to fear most corporate AND government
power. That is a huge point to agree on. I think that if we can keep
that agreement in mind we can move TOGETHER beyond slogans. But i am
not sure how.
Chris Feola wrote circa 10-05-17 10:05
Message]
From: glen e. p. ropella g...@agent-based-modeling.com
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 5/17/2010 11:46:40 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-17 09:08 AM:
We all seem to fear
Vladimyr -
I appreciate your $.02 Canadian as well as the uniquely Russian
perspective you seem to have, especially on the application of political
power/might/will against the individual. I also appreciate your taste
for Irish Stout... I have no idea what it might do for the digestion of
Chris -
Hey Nick,
I'm a libertarian; I hope you don't mind me taking a crack at it.
Most small L libertarians I know (I'm distinguishing us from the Libertarian
Party, which is another thing altogether) are deeply cynical people.
I'm sure you are not alone here as an 'l'ibertarian. I could
Chris -
This is why libertarians believe in divided government. The donkeys and
elephants both steal and abuse power, but they have somewhat different
constituencies. Keeping the government at least partly divided between them
guarantees the honesty of thieves.
That's why I'm hoping our
From a complexity perspective libertarianism is aligned with favoring a
diversity of autonomous agents -- as in a complex system.
It seems to me that a complex system can reasonably be characterized as one
in which there are many autonomous agents, and there is a reasonable
diversity among them
...@shaw.ca
-Original Message-
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: May 17, 2010 4:15 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Vladimyr -
I appreciate your
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-17 11:13 AM:
This sounds like a problem for complexitists and control system theorists.
Right. And although Russ A has come closest to an evidence-based
proposal for CU vs. FEC, with the following two injections:
Russ Abbott wrote circa 10-05-15 02:02 PM:
Vladimyr Ivan Burachynsky wrote circa 10-05-17 04:20 PM:
This now introduces a new dimension, Ethics, I believe. The displacement of
a rock seems clearly outside of any ethical discussion but the displacement
of Peasants is a different matter.
I'm not so sure about that. Any action where the
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 5/17/2010 5:39:20 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-17 11:13 AM:
This sounds like a problem for complexitists and control system
theorists.
Right
-
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com]
On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: May 17, 2010 4:15 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Vladimyr -
I appreciate your $.02 Canadian as well
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-17 05:01 PM:
I am interested in what you Libertarians have to say about the Schelling
situation. Please, for the moment, let's stipulate to the model and its
verisimulitude. Lets further stipulate that NOBODY wants to live in a
segregated neighborhood,
: Monday, May 17, 2010 4:46 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Chris -
This is why libertarians believe in divided government. The donkeys and
elephants both steal and abuse power, but they have somewhat different
Vladimyr
Thanks for the response,
I note two things have shifted in the discussion,
First that now you have placed greater weight on the fact that Power over
others is corruption
Yes, in response to your distinction and emphasis and in deference to
the original posting sense of the term, I
will be happening.
cjf
Christopher J. Feola
-Original Message-
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Nicholas Thompson
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 7:02 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
All,
I am
Victoria / Tory -
IT SEEMS to ME
Steve,
Vlad and the rest of ya,
that barring an INPERSON Whiskey+Stout+Bourbon-based
discussion of this,
there
are assumptions running rife and leaving little hoofprints all over
this conversation that need addressing. Start with-
We did try pretty
Nick,
Thanks for changing the thread and trying to lay the groundwork
carefully here.
Russ,
It is my deepest belief that if our country is to survived, people who
disagree need to learn to argue with each other. You and I really disagree
on this one, so on my account, we are obligated to
My answer to Nick didn't make it to the whole group. I agreed with everything
he said. Now Steve's post really has started me thinking: the power is
corruption is starting to resonate with me. Also the power of not being
there.
I think there is something really, really important in what
: Political Argument in Progress
Nick,
Thanks for changing the thread and trying to lay the groundwork
carefully here.
Russ,
It is my deepest belief that if our country is to survived, people who
disagree need to learn to argue with each other. You and I really
disagree
on this one, so
Nick -
re: argument vs discussion
Perhaps we should rethread again. Owen is our strongest advocate for
thread hygiene, I will defer to his opinion, if this is enough of a
discursion to warrant re-threading.
Point taken. I guess the distinction between the two is that in an
argument,
: May 16, 2010 7:59 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WARNING: Political Argument in Progress
Nick -
re: argument vs discussion
Perhaps we should rethread again. Owen is our strongest advocate for
thread hygiene, I will defer to his opinion
Russ,
It is my deepest belief that if our country is to survived, people who
disagree need to learn to argue with each other. You and I really disagree
on this one, so on my account, we are obligated to argue.
On the other hand, I DON'T believe that others should unwillingly be a
party to
Let's be clear about which Russ you are talking to. This was Nick to Russ G.
-- Russ A
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Nicholas Thompson
nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote:
Russ,
It is my deepest belief that if our country is to survived, people who
disagree need to learn to argue with
30 matches
Mail list logo
