Good work, Nick. Another example of how both-and is better than either-or.
--- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:47 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Yikes. I forgot to attach the attachment. > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > [email protected] > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Jochen Fromm > *Sent:* Sunday, April 26, 2020 4:13 PM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve > > > > Hi Nick, > > > > have you thought about turning your ideas about the hard problem of > consciousness into an article or book? 10 years ago you had this nice idea > of a cross section of reality, a unique slice of the same world that is > responsible for our subjective experience. Our discussion in 2010 inspired > me to write these blog posts (which nobody except Glen read): > > > http://blog.cas-group.net/2010/11/the-solution-to-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness/ > > http://blog.cas-group.net/2011/11/path-dependent-subjective-experience/ > > http://blog.cas-group.net/2013/06/solving_the_problem_of_subjectivity/ > > > > I believe this approach is a good explanation for the hard problem. It is > what Hollywood has been doing for the last 100 years: showing us what it is > like to be someone else. In this sense Hollywood has solved the biggest > problem of philosophy. As I said the biggest secrets are often hidden in > plain sight. > > > > -J. > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: [email protected] > > Date: 4/26/20 23:05 (GMT+01:00) > > To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' < > [email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > > Subject: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve > > > > Hi, everybody, > > > > I am striving mightily to get my brain out of the corvid19 cesspit, and > Stephen and Glen have been helping me, in part by talking about an old > wrangle that Stephen and I have shared over the role of selection (if any) > in evolution. In these arguments, I have always felt that Stephen has > strived to maneuver me into the sights of his largest gun, but, whenever he > fires it, the shells seem to go whizzing by me as if fired at somebody else > entirely. So this letter is written primarily to Glen and Steve, but I > post it here because I think some few of you (Dave?) may have something to > say about what I say, here. > > > > I have often said that FRIAM saved my intellectual bacon. I say this > because when I came to Santa Fe in 2006, it was to help my wife help my son > and his wife raise my infant grandchildren -- clearly not a full time > job. I justified the venture to my provost with vague hope that I would > attach myself either to the evolutionary psychology group at UNM or to the > Santa Fe Institute or both. In fact, neither panned out. > > > > And thus, cast loose in Santa Fe, I fell into the arms of Stephen, Carl, > and Owen, and … FRIAM. The attached abstract of piece I never wrote > (because I never could dragoon Gillian Barker into writing for me) reveals > the state of my mind at the time. I was clearly already teetering between > selectionist and systemist thinking. It had dawned on me during my > previous sabbatical down the corridor from Lyn Margulis that any theory of > natural selection required *as a precondition* additivity of variance, > and nothing that we had learned about epigenesis in the previous gave us > much hope that additivity of variance was a likely condition of > inheritance. So, if additivity of variance was not an obvious consequence > of epigenetic relations, it must somehow be an achievement of them. Two > possibilities occurred to me at the time: one is that genetic mechanisms > were themselves selected for “fairness” – a selectionist explanation; or, > that fairness somehow fell out of the underlying chemical and biological > structures – a systemist explanation. > > > > This is already enough biography to choke a horse, so I shall wrap up, > here. Suffice it to say that, when Stephen showed me Wolfram’s book I was > stunned. Here was a demonstration of how simple rules could generate > complex structures without any nudges from any selection mechanism. Could > additivity of variance and, therefore, natural selection, itself “fall out” > of chemical and energetic relations. Could systems coddle natural > selection the way rear flank downdrafts coddle a tornado. Could we have > natural selection for free. > > > > Only in my late 60’s at the time, I harbored the illusion that I myself > could be come a master of the art of computation. Alas, that ship had > sailed. So, now you see me. “I yam what I yam,” as Popeye used to say. > But one thing I yam NOT is the ferocious adherent to genic selection theory > that Stephen needs me to be if I am going to be felled by his biggest gun. > > > > And now I have to cook dinner for my 13 and 17 year old grandchildren. > The oldest is learning rendering from Stephen. Life will go on! > > > > Ever grateful for your assistance, > > > > Nick > > > > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
