Roger Critchlow wrote at 10/15/2013 08:24 AM:
[...] correctly formed > explanations can be uninformed opinions or fallacious reasonings or imaginary evidence, and flawed as they are they can still sound true to some social population, so people get positive feedback for ridiculous explanations and build up self-consistent systems of explanations.
Steve Smith wrote at 10/15/2013 10:41 AM:
I like this description. [...] The pursuit of Truth has an overtone of an absolute or objective rather than the mere relativism of "finding resonance with others". Here is where I think Natural Science emerged... from the activities of humans that roughly fit the model of seeking resonance with nature, of hypothesis and experiment as call and response. [...] Those who know how to manipulate it's resonances get the bulk of it (to use the 1%/99% inequity argument).
Excellent! Roger posits a fundamental twitch at the center of the generation. So, to sum up, we have: 1) metaphor as a source of mapping distinguishable constructs, 2) finite capacities as a source of error in such mappings, 3) a random (or mystery behind an event horizon) generator, and 4) selection for what (doesn't) work(s). I think these fit together quite well enough to provide for some hypotheses to answer Lee's question. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. -- H.L. Mencken ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
