> On Feb 25, 2025, at 14:50, Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If you think that you are better able to predict your own behavior than your > partner — or your dog, for that matter — then the evidence is against you. > First-person accounts of behavioral causality are notoriously shoddy. I feel > that that was a bullet that both Ryle and Dennet were unable to bite. > I must admit that I read this and suspect the data were chosen to be those that fall under this outcome.
Sucker-punching wouldn’t work if the puncher were no better at anticipating what he would do (meaning, whether he even is a puncher) than the punchee. It seems that there must be a very large collection of other microscopic daily activities that fit a similar description. I’m thinking of a natural number; try to guess which one it is… I’m supposed to be reviewing this really tedious paper, so my mind wanders endlessly to every calculation I wish I were allowed to do instead of this. Do you know, minute by minute, what “image” of the structure of which calculation happens to be the object of my procrastination daydreaming? They’re very definite, and sometimes I see next steps in the calculations. But you’re the psychologist, and not I. Eric
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
