Steve Smith wrote:

 

I sense frustration in many of us when we try to talk about our various topics 
of specialty (as amatuers or professionals) with our significantly educated 
(but in other (sub)disciplines) lay-colleagues.   It seems that in the attempt 
to be more precise or to make evident our own lexicons for a particular subject 
that we end up tangling our webs in this tower of Complexity Babel (Babble?) we 
roam, colliding occasionally here and there.

Right, Steve.

 

I wouldn’t have it any other way.  It is one of the few places on earth where, 
fwiw, people are struggling with the problem.  Fighting the good fight against 
semantic hegemony.

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2019 12:20 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Motives - Was Abduction

 





Nick writes:

 

< Ok, Marcus, I am standing my ground as a realist here: ():-[) >

 

There you go trying to claim semantics for terms in a public dictionary again.  
 (That’s an example of taking ground, like in my Go example.)    Doing so 
constrains what can even be said.   It puts the skeptic in the position of 
having to deconstruct every single term, and thus be a called terms like  
<https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kellyanne-conway-embarrasses-cnns-jim-acosta-during-heated-exchange>
 smartass when they force the terms to be used in other contexts where the 
definition doesn’t work.   A culture itself is laden with thousands of de-facto 
definitions that steer meaning back to conventional (e.g. racist and sexist) 
expectations.   To even to begin to question these expectations requires having 
some power base, or safe space, to work from.  

I think this is the "genius" of Trump's campaign and tenure... he operates from 
his own (and often ad-hoc) Lexicon and that reported 39% stable base of his 
seems happy to just rewrite their own dictionary to match his.   That seems to 
be roughly Kellyanne's and Sarah's only role (and skill?), helping those who 
want to keep their dictionaries up to date with his shifting use of terms and 
concepts up to date.   

It has been noted that Trump's presidency has been most significant for helping 
us understand how much of our government operates on norms and a shared 
vocabulary.   He de(re?)constructs those with virtually every tweet.   While I 
find it quite disturbing on many levels, I also find it fascinating.   I've 
never been one to take the media or politicians very seriously, but he has 
demonstrated quite thoroughly why one not only shouldn't but ultimately *can't*.

In this case, you assert that some discussants are software engineers and that 
distinguishes them from your category.  A discussant of that (accused / 
implied) type says he is not a member of that set and that it is not even a 
credible set.  Another discussant says the activity of such a group is a skill 
and if someone lacks it, they could just as well gain it while having other 
co-equal skills too.   So there is already reason to doubt the categorization 
you are suggesting.    

I took Nick's point to be that the Metaphors that those among us who spend a 
significant amount of time writing (or desiging) computer systems is alien to 
him, and that despite making an attempt when he first came here to develop the 
skills (and therefore the culture), he feels he has failed and the lingua 
franca of computer (types, geeks, ???) is foreign to him.   Here on FriAM, I 
feel we speak a very rough Pidgen (not quite developed enough to be a proper 
Creole?) admixture of computer-geek, physics, sociology, psychology, 
linguistics, philosophy, mathematics, hard-science-other-than physics, etc. 

I sense frustration in many of us when we try to talk about our various topics 
of specialty (as amatuers or professionals) with our significantly educated 
(but in other (sub)disciplines) lay-colleagues.   It seems that in the attempt 
to be more precise or to make evident our own lexicons for a particular subject 
that we end up tangling our webs in this tower of Complexity Babel (Babble?) we 
roam, colliding occasionally here and there.

- Sieve

 





============================================================
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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.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
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to