Somehow I imagine that Nick means to say there are costly signals in this game — that motor action is thicker than conversation or reflection.
If I am walking across a snowfield that I know to be filled with crevasses, and I know I can’t tell which snow holds weight and which doesn’t, my movement is really different than it is putting my feet on the floor beside the bed in the morning. To take a different example that is counterfactual but easier to use in invoking the real physiological paralysis, if Thank God Ledge on halfdome were not actually a solid ledge, but a fragile bridge, or if there had been a rockfall that left part of it missing and I were blindfolded, or if I were a prisoner of pirates blindfolded and made to walk the plank, my steps would land differently than they do when I get out of bed in the morning. There I didn’t say what anyone else would do in any circumstance, but did claim that my own motions have different regimes that are viscerally _very_ distinct. I’m not sure I can think about whether I would fight for air when being drowned. It might be atavistic and beyond anything I normally refer to as “thought”. I certainly have had people claim to me that that is the case. Those distinctions may occupy a different plane than the distinction between reasonableness and dogmatism all in the world of conversation and the social exchange. But I should not speak for others. Only for myself as a spectator. Eric > On Sep 21, 2017, at 4:32 PM, gⅼеɳ ☣ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No regrets or apology are needed. And even if we are about to "argue about > words" ... I forget what famous dead white guy said that ... it's still > useful to me. > > You say: "if one acts in the assurance that some fact is the case, one cannot > be said to really doubt it" The answer is clarified by reading Marcus' post. > If you act with assurance, then you're not open to changing your mind. So, > you've simply moved the goal posts or passed the buck. > > I *never* act with assurance, as far as I can tell. Every thing I do seems > plagued with doubt. I can force myself out of this state with some > activities. Running more than 3 miles does it. Math sometimes does it. > Beer does it. Etc. But for almost every other action, I do doubt it. So, I > don't think we're having the discussion James and Peirce might have. I think > we're talking about two different types of people, those with a tendency to > believe their own beliefs and those who tend to disbelieve their own beliefs. > > Maybe it's because people who act with assurance are just smarter than people > like me? I don't know. It's important in this modern world, what with our > affirmation bubbles, fake news, and whatnot. What is it that makes people > prefer to associate with people whose beliefs they share? What makes some > people prefer the company of people different from them? Etc. > > > On 09/21/2017 01:20 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: >> I am afraid this discussion is about to dissolve into a quibble about the >> meaning of the words "doubt" and "belief", but let's take it one more round. >> In my use of the words ... and I think Peirce's ... one can entertain a >> doubt without "really" having one. Knowledge of perception tells us that >> every perceived "fact" is an inference subject to doubt and yet, if one acts >> in the assurance that some fact is the case, one cannot be said to really >> doubt it, can one? It follows, then, that to the extent that we act on our >> perceptions, we act without doubt on expectations that are doubtable. >> >> Eric Charles may be able to help me with this: there is some debate between >> William James and Peirce about whether the man, being chased by the bear >> who pauses at the edge of the chasm, and then leaps across it, doubted at >> the moment of leaping that he could make the jump. I think James says Yes >> and Peirce says No. If that is the argument we are having, then I am >> satisfied we have wrung everything we can out of it. >> >> Anyway. I regret being cranky, but I can't seem to stop. Is that another >> example of what we are talking about here? > > -- > ☣ gⅼеɳ > > ============================================================ > 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 > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
