I guess Your Man Pierce will never be mine :-) On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:59 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, Gary, > > > > Now My Man Peirce was allergic to determinism. He liked to say that if > the world was not as random as it could be, it was pretty damned close. > When he said things like this, I think he was thinking about relations > between events. Here’s a quick exposition of that point of view. > > > > Let experience be as random as it could possibly be; indeed, Peirce thinks > that experience is approximately that random. Considering all the events > that are going on at any one moment -- the ticking of the clock, the > whuffing of the wind in the eaves, the drip of the faucet, the ringing of > the telephone, the call from the seven-year-old upstairs who cannot find > his shoes, the clunking in the heating pipes as the heat comes on, the > distant sound of the fire engine passing the end of the street, the entry > of the cat through the pet door, the skitter of mouse-feet behind the > wainscoting -- most will be likely unrelated to the fact that the egg timer > just went off. Perhaps not all, however. Perhaps the cat anticipates > cleaning up the egg dishes. Perhaps the same stove that is boiling the egg > water has lit a fire in the chimney. But whatever relations we might > discover amongst all these events, we can find an infinite number of other > temporally contiguous events that are not related to them. Thus, as Peirce > says, events are just about as random as anybody could care them to be. > > > > I see that I have begged my own question of what randomness IS. But the > rarity that any one event in the universe implies the occurance of any > other. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > [email protected] > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Gary Schiltz > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 16, 2020 8:32 PM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > [email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] alternative response > > > > If I understand correctly, random in the statistical sense, is just a > distribution. Random, in the colloquial sense, does not exist. All state is > all determined by physical laws. That’s of course without regard to quantum > mechanics. But my beliefs about such things were forged before quantum > theory had been invented, or at least before I had heard of it. It does now > temper my beliefs with a healthy dose of uncertainty. > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:16 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Gary, > > So, am I right to guess that wearing that hat implies a position on the > meaning of the word, “random”? How does that go? > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > [email protected] > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Gary Schiltz > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 16, 2020 5:27 PM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > [email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] alternative response > > > > Putting on my determinist hat (which I usually wear), I would say that the > event of the neighbor passing by your study > > was pre-determined by the forces established at the instant of the Big > Bang. As is everything else. > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 4:59 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is the question whether it was "pre-determined?" Or is the question whether > it was predetermined by Charles?? I have a neighbor who passes my study > window every afternoon at 4pm with his very floppy cocker spaniel. Is that > event predetermined by the dog (who begs to go out at 3.30), by Scott (who > welcomes the distraction), by the clock (which he checks to keep the dog > honest), or .... > > I know this because I used to set out for coffee every afternoon at that > time, and we would often meet on my doorstep and walk together a few paces > down the street. Because of COVID I don't do that any more. Did COVID > determine my change of behavior? Or did I make a FREE choice. > > I think the freedom of free will is just an ideological matter. Each of us > is supposed to be a master of our behavior and circumstances. Indeed, in > some jurisdictions, you can be popped in the loony-bin for not being so. > In > which case, I think, the loony bin is where we all belong. Or perhaps > are? > > Anyway, Glen will accuse me of strawmanning again. Forgive me. I have > been > tortured by dualists all my life, and now I am visiting my revengte on all > of you. > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > Clark University > [email protected] > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 3:38 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response > > An attempt to steelman via wingman: > > The idea that Glen is proposing is to highlight a sweet spot in one's > experience where unfamiliarity competes with habit. Glen advocates for > bracketing questions of a prime mover or that which happens in pathological > limits. Instead, he wishes to constrain the scope of free will to a > question > of free versus bound with respect to some arbitrary > component/scale/neighborhood (the free will zone). I will try not to fight > this as I still think of this interpretation of *free will* as being a > discussion of will, determined or not. For instance, I may be willful and > determined. > The value > I see in Glen's perspective is that we can develop a grammar for discussing > deliberate action, perhaps involving a Bayesian update rule to an otherwise > evaporative memory or local foresight. He is advocating to not concern > ourselves with whether or not Charles Bukowski was *predestined* to be a > drunk, but rather with determining where the *choice* to do otherwise may > have been. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe > 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 > un/subscribe 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 > un/subscribe 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 > un/subscribe 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 un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
