Peter, Stephen, list,
Peter, you wrote:
PS: I am a little surprised at the lack of follow-up from the list to
Steve's suggestions, below. I do not personally have any opinion
regarding the prospect of Peirceans forming a new generation of public
intellectuals, but this is a theme that I recall
Dear Steven,
No, your observation is not redundant, and it is very much to the point.
Familiarity may generate trust, which in turn facilitates discussion. Also, if
your discussion partners are restricted to those who share your assumptions and
your interests, you can probe more deeply into
Peircers,
There have been some related developments occurring in the mathematical
community lately.
It is beyond my powers to summarize the issues, so here are just a couple of
recent links
that may serve to give onlookers a hint of what's afoot:
Thanks. I have not had a chance to read it yet, but it certainly looks relevant.
Peter
From: C S Peirce discussion list [PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU] on behalf of
Gary Richmond [richmon...@lagcc.cuny.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 6:05 PM
To:
Looks interesting ...
I created a topic for Peirce —
http://www.researchgate.net/topic/Charles_Sanders_Peirce/
I can nominate any other curators who will serve if nominated ...
Jon
--
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb:
Jon, List,
This is a great idea, Jon. Please nominate me for this topic.
Best,
Gary
On 1/18/12, Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net wrote:
Looks interesting ...
I created a topic for Peirce —
http://www.researchgate.net/topic/Charles_Sanders_Peirce/
I can nominate any other curators who will
Just a note to let everybody know that I am alive and well and I have not
forgotten about this slow read. I have been away and otherwise engaged two
weekends in a row, which has put me somewhat behind. I should get back on track
in the next few days.
Cheers,
Peter
Here's something directly relevant to this paper that i just spotted in the New
York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/science/open-science-challenges-journal-tradition-with-web-collaboration.html?_r=1nl=todaysheadlinesemc=tha26
Gary F.
-Original Message-
Sent: January-17-12
Peter, List,
Thanks for this post, and especially for your intriguing questions. I
also am not familiar with arXiv beyond Joe's discussion of it, so I
haven't much to say about Ginsparg's system as such. I am, however,
attending a dinner party this Saturday with a colleague-friend, the
physicist
Ben,
Thank you for your comments, which I have been chewing on. I wish I had some
insightful responses, but this is all I come up with.
You wrote:
“I find it very hard to believe that the second computer revolution could have
very easily failed to take place soon enough after the first one,
I shall with fear and trembling venture a short explanation of the movement
to cyberfy the world. It signaled the end, bitter and ongoing, of oil and
the car. The PC became the new car, with requisite lingo about speed and so
forth. And availability to all. It was a market force toward the
Gary,
This may, as you note, be tangential to the present discussion, but it is
ceertainly of intrinsic interest, and I hope to find time to catch up on this
literature in the not too distant future.
Peter
From: Gary Richmond [richmon...@lagcc.cuny.edu]
Peter, list,
Thanks for your response.
The augmentationist vision itself in its essence does not seem a conceptually
difficult one. In the 1970s I had some amateur notion of it though I knew
nothing of practical developments in IA. Without the initial government funding
and without the early
Ben Udell asked: ...So, my question, which I find I have trouble
posing clearly, is, granting that IA involves an extension of mind in its
abilities/competences as well as its cognitions, does it much extend volition
and feeling (including emotion)?
In my view it clearly does,
I must say that I share Eugene's concern.
It seems to me that modern computing technology is less Intelligence
Augmentation and more a poorly contrived manipulation of intelligence, not all
of which has a beneficial effect and none of the effects of which are well
understood.
Indeed, when I
Steven, Gene, Ben, Peter, List,
IA as contributing to the possibility of actual intelligence augmentation is a
mere goal of such visionary thinkers as Engelbart, Technology is a tool that
can be used wisely or poorly, as several have already noted. My friends who
teach in some of the better
Gary,
Thank you for those thoughtful and informative comments. I was interested to
hear of your interactions with Engelbart, and that I may have sparked an
interest in Peirce on his part. Generally, though, I do not see anything that
requires any direct comment from me, except to note that I
Sorry, one major error: in the 4th paragraph beginning, For example, I
wrote those
non-constraints on matter which Peirce calls 'habits'. The non-
shouldn't be there. GR
Gary Richmond 12/11/11 3:05 PM
Peter, Gary F., Jon, List,
I'm sorry it took a little while to respond to your message,
Gary,
Yes, I agree; that is explicit enough. Thanks for digging this up.
Peter
From: C S Peirce discussion list [PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU] on behalf of
Gary Fuhrman [g...@gnusystems.ca]
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 5:19 PM
To:
Gary,
Just a couple of comments. In my view Peirce and Turing play analogous roles in
some respects but not in others. Turing directly influenced the evolution of AI
and articulated - whether in jest or in earnest - the computational model of
the mind later embraced and abandoned by Putnam,
I am now opening the slow read of Joe Ransdell’s paper ‘The Relevance of
Peircean Semiotic to Computational Intelligence Augmentation’, the final paper
in this slow read series. I realize that Steven’s slow read is still in
progress, but we have had overlapping reads before.
Since we are
Peter, re the question you raise here ...
JR: “In developing Skagestad’s conception further in the direction indicated I
also ground this in Peirce’s dictum, but I do so by making explicit a different
(but complementary) implication of the same Peircean dictum, namely that all
thought is
Peter, list,
I began my paper, Trikonic Inter-Enterprise Architectonic,
http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/richmond/trikonic_architectonic.pdf
thus:
Peter Skagestad in “'The Mind's Machines: The Turing Machine, the Memex,
and the Personal Computer” considers the history of Artificial
23 matches
Mail list logo
