But how do we process this statement by Nick: On 4/17/20 4:08 PM, [email protected] wrote: > I think an obsessively metaphorical thinker is one who has the arrogance to > suppose that s/he has */some/* familiar experience by which s/he can model > any experience of another person. I actually don't believe that that is > true, but I think it is true enough that I feel it is my obligation to try.
He's straight up *saying* that metaphor is used as a way to solve or gloss over the hard problem. Now, I don't particularly care if it's actually Nick we're talking about or some other "obssesively metaphorical thinker". But it strikes me that one cannot simultaneously believe that all thinking is metaphorical and *not* admit to some form of the hard problem. On 4/29/20 10:11 AM, Eric Charles wrote: > I think we should take the inadequacy of the wastebasket example as evidence > that Nick is being honest about really, really not understanding what the > hard problem is. -- ☣ uǝlƃ .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... 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/
