Integral Systems Theory

Given that a System is an information structure, we can proceed to analyze the world in terms of its nested information structures or subsystems. All of the dynamics of complex systems can be realized in theory and observation by decomposing natural systems along emergent information flow boundaries. In biological cybernetics and cognitive sciences, we can analyze living organisms as self-producing and maintaining networks of processes that are open to the environment and the other beings coexisting therein. With the development of symbolic language in the homo line, the stage was set for developing extended phenotypes in material culture. With homo sapiens and the Neolithic Age this kicks into high gear, first accellerating slowly but the pace of change is ramping up the whole time.

This is how we find ourselves in the age of disruptive change where we either wise up fast or get kicked off the planet by our own actions. Much of the change is in the technology of information systems, but even more significant is the evolution of material culture noted above. The ability to not just use tools but to invent them requires an interruption in the normal uses of language that give only the capacity to use language within the given framework. To invent a new tool the individual must first imagine using that tool. A tool might be modified and made better within a space of variation already given, but a new category of tools for a new food source. First the new action including possible invention has to be imagined, the tools fashioned and use attempted. Failure reveals more of the world and now more people engage and play and experiment until sucess. When cognition can go beyond the manipulation of a world given and think about the experience outside the fishbowl of a given life-world embedded necessarily in learned habits of perception and responding active rituals.

Initially, this process might be largely pre-linguistic and take place only within the mind of one or more bright individuals manipulating, making and trying different use patterns. It would not need extensive verbal language and could be done completely in the hands-on process of doing things, maybe first as an individual and then showing how it works and others picking it up directly from watching other individuals in action. Verbal cues need not be any more or less than what is already in use before the new invention is introduced. The special cognitive mode of stepping back and considering is only required in the initial stages when the invention is new and and use is novel. Smaller adjustments can now evolve on top of the initial innovation with more ordinary thinking prompted by limitations revealed in use and further trial and error.

The break from life as given to the examined life of awareness is deep and wide and in general not of much survival value within a given way of living. On the other hand, for creating new ways of living and responding adaptively to a changing situation, it is obvious how thinking outside the box might save the day not only for the wise guy with a crazy plan but the whole social group. Inventions of new tools and even ephemeral ways of thinking and doing things almost require trade to develop in parallel with new lingustic modes of dissemination of new tools and culture.

Anthropologists can trace the development and dissemination of culture in a number of ways, and one of them is the way that different tools and technique appear and spread over time and place. Many of the sites producing data are relatively recent discoveries, yet another indicator of disruptive change. We now have so many well-educated specialists that all fields are accellerating as more trained field workers spread about the world and are recruited from more diverse places and cultures. However this capacity originated, once established, it feeds back and accellerates the pace of change. Language goes back to a number of our homonid ancestors although we can only speculate about the language use and cultural possibilities of extinct relatives. Some tools and material culture were alreacy present, but the record shows only very limited development over long histories before the recent period of accellerated growth.

Another aspect that none can ignore is the pace of change in digital technologies. Moore's law will not go on forever, but it has not bottomed out yet. This field was primative when I was born, and at a price that I built a kit computer in high school. Today's youth have what would have been a supercomputer then in the palm of their hands. This means that all the sciences can gather, store and process ever more data. We can also process the data in many ways that seem to magically extract knowledge and use learning processes to teach machines to do what used to require a human. The information technologies of speech, writing and numbers start the ball rolling and now it just shifted into a new much higher gear with a whole new set of gears we don't even know how to access yet.

This brief outline goes a long way to justifying the need for systems theory as a foundational component of any theory of everything (ToE). It should also make clear why any ToE is necessarily incomplete in some very deep ways. The formalities of theory can never fully capture the actuality of emegent systems of natural science. We have special sciences of each level of organization of reductionist models of natural s;ystem dynamics, and they can only be joined into a coherent picture with system theory. To develop a theory, we will need to define the elemental objects and their properties, but we must resist finally settling on particular definitions so that our theory will remain open to modified definitions that better match working practices. Ultimately this work should be grounded in pragmatic philosophy where knowledge is the result of experience in the practices in one or more fields of inquiry. This is also postmodernist in that no tradition is privileged and the truth will be multiple in the sense that some traditions will likely have conflicting truths. We can work to resolve such conflicts, but only by constructing spaces where meanings can be translated and considered outside any traditoin.

The success of the reductionist, objectivist epistemologies is that none can really seriously deny their import whenever their application is successful. The failure is to not recognize that this doesn't complete the picture. Systems theory can be used as a bridge. Understanding that Plato's eternal forms of mathematics are just that, patterns of relating that are independent of time, place and context, but that also leaves an enormous space for the contingent, historical or as the economists say, "path dependent". This is not only the path into the world for meaning and aesthetics, but it is the cure for self-importance. It could have been otherwise. The past does not fully determine the future. This is an informational property of the Universe, information can and is created and destroyed and that is the source of all asymetries in time and the difference between time an space.

I'd have to check this fully with the philosophical physicists, but if your theory has observation and the collapse of the wave function as real and significant to what exists, then information is created and destroyed in time. Therefore, nothing is time reversable, but it leaves open a lot more possibility of significant (meaningful) connections between past, present and future. Consciousness, if essentially quantum based, might be able to navigate time in some causal (intentional?) ways.

-> Integral because integration of parts into wholes is a more important distinction. Of course it is universal. Integral also good in that it refers to wholeness which ties to whole numbers, zero, one and the rest generated from relations of these two. 

Strong advocates of reductionism and in general philosophers of science who focus to closely on foundations, what is the most basic stuff that everything else is made of only consider analysis and require that emergent systems levels must be fully determined by the actions and elements of the foundational elements are making a huge error. It isn't just the kind of whole systems behavior observed in many simple dynamic system that exhibit complex emergent processes that are inherently unpredictable. That is one aspect of this principle, but more important is what it means for the behavioral aspects of living systems. The high level behavior of people in culture.

Principle of threes: refer to Peirce and his demonstrations that two elements are insufficient and any more complex can be build from them. {0, 1, (0, 1)} or maybe this way too: {\varnothing , 0, 1} as nothing, none (of x) and some.


System Levels

If emergence is ontological, then each level of any systems analysis must match the real levels of systems organization present. There are obvious differences between different kinds of collective organizations depending on the relative agentcy of the whole and the parts, as well as all the issue around how the parts are related such that the emergent properties arise. Central to our theory is the pragmatic separation of the path of inquiry to its final destination and the real as independent of what even is thought about it. We may have a very exact model with highly accurate predictions bourn out in experiment, and yet the model both must be incomplete as it only describes a situation in some respects and not others, and exact results that would rule out subtle influences would require infinite time to measure. It isn't a matter of trying to slip in a margin for the action of miraculous interventions of God at a sufficiently subtle level, but that the interfaces to other valid and active levels of the system come into play. E.g. the agency of the conscious entity the emerges in mental processes and bodily experiences and affordances does causally impact the physiochemical processes down the stack. 

Protocol stacks are just one kind of system stack, and depending on what the aspects of the system are being considered, it will be a stack of a different kind of system elements. Information systems and their network interconnects are very formalized systems with precisely specified boundaries and interfaces. The whole point of the OSI and similar network stacks is to decompose the design into formal layers and have each one addressed by different sets of specifications. Below we introduce a way of thinking about systems organization the allows for systems function and purpose to be realigned. When the elements have individual agency, and the coding of cognitive systems of agency are flexible, the network can reconfigure on the fly to any configuration that can be coded for in the systems behaviors.



The universe is still "coming into being" and becoming aware

The New Cosmic Story | Robert Wright & John Haught [The Wright Show]

All fields of knowing with their languages and communities of meaning making are the same WRT the truth. The truth is what emerges in meaning making, but what we know of it is never final. You may reach a satisfactory final interpretation in some inquiries and those truths are circumscribed by the communities who use of translate the fields in which that truth appears. What we all have faith in is that although the ways and languages of meaning making or different and reveal different aspects of a total truth, we are all discussing the same overlapping realities. The truth itself is elusive like the whale. Even if some foolish troop manages to locate and get within harpoon range, the whale will slip away. The whale you killed is not the real whale, it disappears into the mists at the ending moment.

gerry 3:15 AM [ maybe these ideas link to Feminist Theorist thinker Karen Barad, I think -- there is a vid link of her here somewhere ]

Unity vs. ? in groups. Talking about the retaining of individual identity within groups. There is something really surprising in physics that is worth digging into with respect to meanings and this idea in particular.

Summary: Pauli exclusion principle says that fermions (fundamental particle subgroup, distinguished by having "half spins" vs "bosons" with integer (whole number) spins. The former, like matter aggregates into chunks of matter, but the latter can overlap (be in same place, which for a physicist they say "have the same quantum state vector"). Another oddity here is that pairs of opposite spin and otherwise same state fermions can act like bosons. In physics, all this gets mathematical definition which allows the scientists and engineers to calculate and simulate to high levels of precision.

Upshot of the exclusion principle leads to all of the solidity of the world at human scale that we experience depends on fermions taking up space and forming solid bodies at all scales (sizes), and the overlapping bosons are more like energy than matter (this blurs in physics theory and measurements, but is a good analogy).

I keep getting Planck and Pauli mixed up on this. I think Wolfgang Pauli is the one who talked about synchronicity with Jung. Not sure how or whether to mix this in.

[ stuff like this easy to find, related are some books I have re syncronicity - think about this for keywords, say linking pauli, jung and syncronicity. keywords are important design element in digital world, search engine fodder ]

Brain PickingsBrain Pickings

Atom, Archetype, and the Invention of Synchronicity: How Iconic Psychiatrist Carl Jung and Nobel-Winning Physicist Wolfgang Pauli Bridged Mind and Matter

Two of humanity’s greatest minds explore the parallels between spacetime and psyche, the atomic nucleus and the self.

[ some comments on bits in video that I might reference -- keyword? inexhaustable ]

John Haught: at about 57:?? write understanding (what one is looking for in seeking the truth)

"is my bright idea a wright (true in my language) idea" flipped to mean do I have the courage to see if it is a great idea of a brain fart. When expanded, is the meaning within the theory well matched to the world. This is a sense of truth's agency, no? Central to any field that is interested in truth, and I would say they all are.

Inexhaustible depth (talking about in relationship with a person, but this is the sense of the depth of truth, always deeper place to get to if you have the courage) (edited)


I think I want a subtitle: Agency of Truth: Doctrine and Heresy

[ Need to write an abstract that connects title to content and key conclusions -- After all the isms, no more post-modernist vs. modernist wars. Resolution (third way/element) by translations (converging of forces in assembled (well) systems) keyword: assemblage theory ? need to research this a little ]

[ maybe a picture of this --- standard two dimension qualia projection: Agency is for me related to consciousness (vs. automated) in intelligent agents (humans, biota as individuals and systems), so that on the up down axis and Doctrine vs. Heresey as left/right -- keyword? semiotic square -- search for "semiotic square greimas", many cool things, many things that can be general references if we want to use them ]

Skepticism dictates that no doctrine is final, otherwise doctrine is dogma. Doctrine welcomes the heretic for two reasons, 1) the truth is not threatened by the heretic, but rather strengthened because 2) if the heretic turns out to be right, then we have new truth and doctrine will be adapted. Ancient revelation is always and only partial. To think otherwise represents an infection of the ancient traditions with the static formalisms of Plato. Socrates would not have approved of such dogmatic formalisms. Not to say Platonism is wrong, maybe incomplete, maybe mis-interpreted. Such is the fate of revelation, fixation of dogmatic interpretation and a potential for the formation of mobs of shallow understandings. The Truth is inexhaustibly deep. If Plato and the Greeks missed something it is about whether Truth is a static thing outside of spacetime, or a development of spacetime. There are good and bad ways to investigate these questions and the dogmatic profits of scientism from Bertrand Russel and his like to their present day bretheren. They are simply wrong because they failed to appreciate the depth of all ways of knowing including their favorite tool maths. Math, like any creative human activity of truth seeking, is infinitely deep (citing Godel in math, Church and Turing in information systems (applied maths))

Matter shot through and through with Spirit (talking about Teilhard de Chardin). He is really a catholic mystic, whose more metaphysical writings are completely compatible with a materialism that does not deny the role of spirit. Related: Intelligent Design only is "wrong" if it asserts an anthropological God of creation, taken as deeply metaphorical, open materialism (radically skeptical is another way of saying this) it is not dogmatic and coherent with other views and a particular level of systems description.

To Catholic audiences, one might discuss whether "Heresy is now permitted" and would bring out many believing and skeptical (cultural) Catholics (and other Christians) alike. Would be a really popular topic on the GatW circuit.

"everything is real insofar as it acts" Central idea of OOO and the ground of this thinking. Mentioned Latour early WRT the identity (in category) of subject and object, which if you recall is how I introduce the idea that objects are always also agents (i.e. subjects)

Graham Harman: Morton’s Hyperobjects and the Anthropocene

Latour once called himself the only French Pragmatist (this totally justifies bringing in Peirce and I think I can assume some familiarity with this in the audience)

Note Harman is the founder of this journal AFAICT, so this material is deeply relevant to my paper.

Idea that may be productive RE: Harman's concept of a "Third table" (we can ref this directly) and extending it with the concept of inexhaustibility of the object in itself.


Not a third, but 3, 4, 5 ... inexhaustible, limited by the imagination of the sense maker (interpreter, agent)


Related: de Chardin as noted above WRT other vid: identity of the individual does not reduce to that of the group. The inexhaustibility is equivalent to the potential of individual identity. In the existing, this is always finite, but if the future does remain open to future humans with new ideas, it never ends.

Gerry.....2020-03-20 11:39:17 UTC

[ some notes cut from within card ]

Minsky says: the evolution just forgets its mistakes, but I think we must trouble this claim. If an information system can save traces of what didn't work, then it can retain some ability to respond in yet anther way to stress or threat of extenction. Darwin and much after ignores the social aspects of information systems. What travels with what. It is sometimes said that most DNA coding seems to be just junk, random information that codes for nothing. By Turing and related proofs, you can't say anything like that. If you start asking how might it do that, and know how creative evolutionary search processes are, you would not say that anything is fogotten. Archived in the Akashic records outside of time and space.


Stuff vs. Structure: things, matter, fermions, patterns, energy, bosons: Everything has both aspects, and each phenomemal event bridges between them to the extent that we can't really separate them. The claim that the world is just mathematical, ideas says that it is just structure, no stuff, and in some ultimate sense this can be true. If you think the world is just a simulation, you don't believe in any reality, but if you go the other way you may be forced to believe (positively) in any reality or all possible reality. If we are truly a skeptic, we cannot take either of these as conclusive. Personally the latter is much more attractive and horrifying as well.


In physics: to get exact answer, you need infinite number of measurements by an infinitely large aperatus. This will be important for understanding systems and emergence.


Related is concept of using principles of minimizing the action. Implied in a sense that the particle knows where it is going so it can select its path. You have to have the start and end states to know it.


Difference between the system itself and the description of it. All the models for each subsystem and their relationships are also extracted from the world with experiments and measurements, always finite measurement with finite systems doing the measurements, therefore only partial precision and in fact the model itself and the system relations for emergent systems are underdetermined themselves. By this I mean that the models of the parts of the world involved in the measuring, the objects of study and the instruments and scientists are necessarily partial and tentative. This is just to say that the work is incomplete, but given the infinities involved in complete precision implied an even more radical incompleteness. The distance from the finite to the infinite is beyond any measure, and the complete model necessary to understand may be well off into the infinite reaches of very real possibility.


Arkani-Hamed at about 1:00 in he reduces all possible Feynman diagrams to combinations of two basic element which look remarkably like an icon for a triadic sign. A node with three edges with either a black or white node. The leaves are labelled labels, which must be just quantum states of simple standard model particles. So for interactions with more than three elements you can just do permutation at the leaves and sum up to get answers for complex Feynman diagrams. This math move actually makes it possible to calculate Feynman diagrams that are far to complex to manage even with the brightest graduate students and the biggest computers.


Leading up to this point he references the history of QM being emergent as a limit in the QM model and a more simple intuitive law that was derived classically. We are talking here about the equivalence of Schnell's law using refractive indexes and the method of minimizing action which is mathematically isomorphic to QM.


Gerald Joyce This work is brilliant on early evolution. Can we develop a language and logic of integral systems that supports this work? Work on autopeotics in systems biology is another aspect of the same thing. In the RNA work, you see several clear indications of the importance of concpets we are developing here. First, information is present but not fully accounted for in an end to end, or full cycle sense. Free energy is flowing through the system, mostly as triphosphates that are part of the individual nucleotide bases, the building blocks of the RNA chains. DNA are another building block for different chains, but that comes later in the story. Free energy is thermodynamic energy, from statistical mechanics, Boltzman, and we also have digital information in the one of four different bases that occur at each location in an RNA macromolecule, two bits per base, and DNA will have this same coding structure.


The rybosome is the cells machinery for making protiens, but it is embeddedd in a much more complex replecation system with many autocatalitic loops and feedback relationships throughout, but if you can show that significant parts and subunits of systems componets, in this case the rybosome, you are starting to demonstrate the plausability the living systems we see today emerging spontaneously over a long history of evolving forms. Joyce seems to have a hypothesis that a complete self-replicating life form based on RNA only would have to precede DNA/RNA life we see, but that may not be the case. In other words, he could be substantially right, but historically a fully autopoetic form of RNA/protein system may never have completely emerged. Or, from another perspective, the DNA systems may have been there much earlier, side by side with the livelier and volitile RNA a more slowly evolving DNA system. They are already looking at cycles of information transfer from RNA to DNA and back again, and the question is only when does this become significant at the whole systems level. Maybe we need to think in terms of open loop and closed loop systems and replication.


He is asked about viruses, and I really wonder about his answer that there are just parasitic. One systems parasite is anothers mainstay. Margullis already showed us how multiple independent self-replicators must have joined forces to create the eukariotic cell, and this begs the question about when, if ever, the simple components would have been independently autopoetic. System boundaries imposed arbitrarily by analysis have no reality, only real barriers to flows of information, energy and macromolecules. Joyce and his colleagues are just studying a small part of the whole system. Given this picture, how can any given autopoetic organism be fully separated from the whole system, from Gaia. The whole planet is alive, not just the individual bits of it. The ego perspective is an illusion created by evolution to serve or autopoetic continuation. No gods are necessary to create this awsome mysterious place we find ourselves, our Garden of Eden. We are arrogant to think our small brains can comprehend it all, and should be content that we understand as much as we do. The old books are koans to spur our imaginations, not maps of the real world. Even Good and Evil are myths of perspective. What purposes are you aligned with? The sin of pride is to think we can know the difference. Even if we can, do we have the power of mind not to deceive ourselves and follow instinctive purpose and give a clever rationalization?


Speaking of systems, what about membranes and sugars? Photosynthesis is maybe way off as an organized system


Could the phenominal world be the equivalent of Leibniz' God? For some reason I have hesitated to dig into Leibniz Monadology as a bit of a reactionary implulse as we have in Newton's odd spiritual writings. I've suspected that maybe monads could be an elemental foundation of a deeper theory. Tim Maudlin's thoughts about the meaning of QM and more, and the way his philosopic thoughts reach beyond the boundaries of physics in a clear thinking way are more the kind of metaphisical grounding that I find necessary for any competent philosophy is heartening, and this is what is guiding my inquiry at this point. Was helpful to get starting thinking about monads. I've long had an insight about the Pauli Exclusion principle, that it is very odd and deep. It must relate to the whole (emergent) vs. the parts (elements/parts at the next lower level) because it is a principle that says something about the quantum states of each part being necessarily different than all the other parts of the whole. Well, the formulations probably don't say whole and parts, but maybe that is fundamental. Plus a principle that any whole is another unique quantum state for the object emergent at the next level.


Hence, all atoms of a crystal, or a macromolecule or a simple molecule will be in a unique (micro)state with respect to any system of which it is a subpart. It begs the question of what makes a bag of parts a whole system, but perhaps this is discoverable with good experiments. The Pauli Exclusion seems a good equivalent for Leibniz' requirement that each monad of a system and therefore the universe must always be in a unique state. How could such a condition be understood accept as a decree of the God that is a necessary condition for the Universe to exist. If you get mathematical and think universally, the number of monads is the power set of all the fundamental subunits. This set is finite for a finite universe. The power set is also finite, but enormous. Two to the power of the number of standard model fermion parts (parts that Pauli excusion principle applies to). This principle allows for the sorts of large scale demonstrations using some variant of the pidgeon hole argument to predict Bolzman's brains in an infinite universe.


However, it may be the the continuum conceived of by Leibniz and taken up in his own way by Peirce are something that makes an important difference in the applicability of such arguments. We might also bring in George Elis and the consideration of the existence of absolute infinities and if potential infinities are enough for a continuum? Does this also once and for all answer Zeno and many paradoxes of infinities. Curiouser and curiouser the worm turns and clarity excapes us.

Gerry.....2020-03-20 11:39:57 UTC

Need to get at the existential status of the complete universe. In other words, from human science perspective, we can only know the universe from Earth, orbiting Sol. We might eventually travel a bit, but only ever 100Ks or even millions of years if we have that long a run of it. Could it be like a virtual world that only has to "complete" the quantum states of the parts that are accessible to us? This would reduce the informational content of the world substantially, but it has to do it in a way that is totally consistent with physics and cosmology and all the other science that is totally consistent with the current history of what we observe.


Have to somehow talk about this re: 1) quantum information viewpoint world as simulation (you wouldn't render all the detail except when fine grained observation and theory are in play) (note this allows a magical (supernatural) truth to play out for magical subjectivities, seems totally unreal. Connect this to Peirce categories. The objects are "remote" from the observer in some sense. Objects as 2ndness. Perspective is firstness perceiving the objects. There is reality to in when you objectivize in cognitive/neural sciences (firstness now is in the scientist looking at objectified brain external to the mind). Then the meanings (also in the perspective of the conscious knower, but doesn't have to have this awareness to be interpretation (intelligence - active agency)

Gerry.....2020-03-20 18:27:18 UTC

The horizon of knowing, and the future of history. We are situated in history in such a way to be able to transcend history and write a lot of the narrative of the future. The Truth of design and engineering in its unfolding for the future is about survival. Athens killed Socrates and sent a force over the horizon that never returned. The contingent mistakes (errors and failures) of Athenean democracy were employed to bare false witness against Socrates and he honored both the truth of the political sphere the needed an emotional outlet (scapegoat) and his truth that he had only spoken truly to honor wisdom as well.

Gerry.....2020-03-20 18:55:15 UTC

[ new section of cut/paste from chat, need to edit out extras/arguments ]

Copied above into note on Integral Systems Theory card.


Viscosity === entaglement --- I believe this can be and needs to be made into math/science observations. Descriptions of how the Higgs gives other particles mass reeks of the need for such a solution.


Systems objects can be (metaphorically) said to spin up or spin down, which in quantum systems describe two potentially entangled states. An existing system can be in transition (spinning up or down) or it can be in one of the stated, up (running) or down (not running), but the spinning states are operating states (running in some sense), but not functioning. Think of living beings and whole life cycles. We don't do this with economic activities, which is why they are always out of balance. They only care about spinning things up and don't worry about EOL (end of life) because economically they externalize them as purely economic business models do with everything they can.

Spinning down gracefully --- Latour's idea that we are on an airplane to the future globe that doesn't exist because it is too large for Gaia to accomodate. Harman talks about some somewhat depressing predictions by Lovelock (inventor or scientific Gaia concept with Lynn Margolus (sp))

I'm like Bucky, good design can mitigate the worst changes, only now we are in need of not only great design, but breakthrough science and engineering. We need it all to survive the crisis well. Even then, it will not be pretty. The horror show will continue until we resolve to care equally for all the living beings. All you need is love. It seems far away with all the alienation and anxiety in the current world, but all it takes is a change of heart with enough people. We can only make it good if we care for one another with inexhautible generosity of being for ourselves and one another.


Debbie 7:24 AM


subtitle gets that the distinction of insider/outsider regular/normal in a field, etc.


Whenever one become sure they are right an does not entertain any objections, the danger of holding to a falsehood for bad reasons comes up.


When my truth become personal for me. My truth is what I can witness to and no more. The truth of the world is much much more that I can ever witness completely, thus I must to some extent trust the work of others.


A lot of thinkers are not trustworthy, that's what critique of method and results is all about.


Let me know if we should copy more of this to discussion for notes. [ did copy up to Tues 3/24 morning ]

gerry 7:47 AM

to make CC work, there has to be a complex system already in place when something big happens. If we were ready, we could have ridden a wave. When we are ready, we can expect new waves of events where care of each other becomes immediately interesting to many.


It is a tool that anyone with a care cause can use. Our only problem is when they ask "what does it take to build it". Ans. 6-18 months for a PoC (depends on funding/time contributor inputs) and after that we can have a plan ready to scale as the market builds.


VV requires the financial bootstrap features. CC should be self-bootstrapping.


Note: project bootstrap is an original one from Doug Englebart


Mariame Kabe? Project NIA (on dem. now ATM)



gerry 7:53 AM

Kaba, she is Chicago activist

[ mostly editing out our exchanges like this, but this one we did well, no? ]

OK. So I am on my own

gerry 7:55 AM

The fear and anxiety of the possibility of financial disaster is what keeps you from being free to act well.


I did not say that. I'm saying that you need to address it and I am here to support. I can address my anxieties also with your support


Stop triggering on your fears.


Debbie 7:57 AM

That's not what you said initially. It comes across as too bad so sad


gerry 7:57 AM

I can't work with you when you are so anxious, so we need to solve that first. You do not work well when you are there. I'm not unaware nor dismissive of your feelings, but trying to coach you forward. Asking similarly for your support when I get stuck.


Debbie 7:58 AM



gerry 7:58 AM

You project "too bad so sad" that is never my intent. You maintain the right to say that I meant what you projected.


That is what makes our fights so hard to end. You have to listen to what the other person is saying, not your own projections. Of course you will have them, you have to be open to observing them and not ready to reject, to push back on any threat to ego stance that you should not be defending.


Debbie 8:47 AM

Good discussion.


gerry 8:47 AM


[ alls well that ends well, the point about projection is what Frege called the sense of a phrase or term. Frege is considered important for initiating a kind of logical semiotic (theory of language), that all the analytics (anglo americans who make all sorts of ultimate validity claims for their projects). Anyway, Frege's "sense" is really the pragmatist's (Peirce most particularly) method that leads to the third part of the sign, the agent perspective of the sign, what the meaning of it is for each particular agent in an assemblage of agents (predator with prey, but any kind of behavior includeing being deeply interpenetrated by the other) ]


Left/Right vs. Truth/Power (in Politics) -> Truth in politics theme (Still from G Harman vid at about 1:00)

Dark web themes and new center of debate -> discussions of political truth (power politics can be examined in a truth context within this space)

[ truth is, that I think all of the people talking about their side of the whale are talking past each other. Mostly it is because different sense-making communities never get completely straight on the sense of the other's meaning in their exchanges. It only actually becomes a true dialog or dialectic when the different arguments and ways of speaking (different languages, practical jargons of each field) are well translated and each gets the true (my theme word) sense of the others argument and either or both can begin to speak each others language and borrow and adapt new senses of old terms or neologism as called for to fully express our meanings to one another. The tower of babel problem is because everyone is speaking and not listening (que the need for architectures, six agreements ... ]

Object object interactions vs. Object human. Talking about Latour talking mostly about the latter. Like at border, the walls and objects are keeping the humans in one place and other humans (border patrol and rescue people) are also interacting with objects and each other. Thinking of O/O case at border and the vultures and the comm tower came to mind. G. Harman thinks O/O cases are more important that Latour says WRT Gaia and climate. Interesting stuff

I'm thinking to focus my truth agency thinking around these dialectics.


Hyperobjects potential list: climate, noosphere (de Chardin's concept of the world Zeitgeist), economy, academy, spirituality (religion draws specific communities together (religion etemology is to bind together if you recall), but can be used to isolate and divide) and industry (now including most agriculture and of course mining, transport and other ways to slice it up, but now is a single global object). Note the information aspects of COVID19 as it relates to hyperobject of the global emergency response to a pandemic.


These are all objects for OR, operations research. That OR guy I have a paper from would maybe be interested in this stuff.



gerry 7:02 AM

Not sure exactly where this should go. I'm really more and more confident of a number of the ideas and that I am going into a time of great potential productivity. I don't need as much what you can do with the writing as for you to help coach me as I have tried (often badly) to do for you. I mean well, I just haven't learned it yet, I'm always learning. What mom taught me were the deep things we all need to learn and relearn: living ones life as a work of art, your creative best in your personal style with only final concern for your own opinion of the efforts.

gerry 7:03 AM

Had some insights about Peircean ideas, and need to make something of it WRT agency and truth. I'm pretty sure not that at some point this work will become a book, but let's concentrate on getting a chapter out as a paper and see what happens from there.

I think also the Book Card I have on Cards needs a direction and to be completed. I know how to architect the whole networked system of cards, but I can't write the code. I could, but I'm way to slow at it. Need first the team gathering and making a team vision from my founding vision. There are high level design/architect projects for many major field of building (i.e. architecting complex systems is one thing, and different depending on the specifics of each system (i.e. air craft carriers or social media networks, or that (social media) plus commons based production of intellectual property of all sorts.) There are master fields, like operations research and general capital theory (which nobody actually does yet, what would a capital system without ideology look like, this is a first question). In the end, we want new systems that will be adopted willingly by everyone, by all the citizens of Gaia regardless of social status, politics of Truth, not of Power. The place for being powerful is in being empowering to other beings, humans and otherwise. The CC concept allows anyone to say "I care for this specific thing, and who wants to help me do it, or collaborate to do this thing as a self-empowering community". The realization of the power of the many needs to respect all aliances, and it need to utilize the soft powers of communication and making common cause. The only hard bits might be resolving conflicts between groups, but isn't this just like human conflict resolution between individuals? Does that not already happen naturally within particular communities? Each having its own norms and rituals to avoid trouble spots or automatically resolve them, like deciding which side of the road to drive on. Like the debates on endian (ref to April fools RFC on computer architecture issue (endian aspect of words to bytes, with itself has a conventional ground (footnote to Peircean firstness as ground)


Reading Peirce's category paper myself. A bit hard to read, but he is so logically precise. I think most of the people who love him are not mathematical and logician enough to appreciate it.


If we get the bootstrap process rolling we'll be triggering many groups and individuals to get grants. These kind of projects are what can fund humanities and other departments. Remember that the existing institutions are hubs for funding. You and I both know how popular a grant writing help/production commons would "sell". Having CC in that commons to spend would enable one to launch their projects and careers. Identity based speculative funding also operative here. I have the vision of how to use new ideas and develop new design and engineering tools to integrate the social media systems with the CC and financial processes. On top of all of this and potentially united as OR (broadening O to Organization, not just its Operations (all of these are OOO objects for application of new design methods and practices (that our VV/CC commons work can do).


I know I go in too many directions, we have to embrace that and still focus on what can be done now. Once I'm in the right networks of conversation, I can get this funded. As head of the company and marketing team, you need to really get your confidence up. Not react to how much this by projecting yourself not up to handling the tasks. All you have to do is spark the right people to desire what is locked in my head. The more hand-wavy we are at this stage, the better. The outside projection of an organization (or persons) identity is always smoke and mirrors. The trick is making in real under the hood. All we need to do is sell some angels on just how important my ideas are. We are looking for special kinds of angels who are really trying to gift their investments to be the widest possible benefit to various communities, in other words they already are all about giving.

gerry 4:15 PM


YouTubeYouTube | Saint Mary's College

A Hunger for Wholeness, Ilia Delio, OSF – Madeleva lecture 2017



gerry 2:53 AM



On Touching: The Alterity Within, Karen Barad

[ told you I had links to her, should try to connect/invite in right way, with right open invitation ]

Turning inside out. She mentions a topology where one thing (object) contains another (other), and also the reverse, the other contains the object. We do this all the time in OO programing (digital object domains, decko as an abstraction is one of these).

Insight hypothesis (brain fart in fancy language): what if quantum dimensions are in some ways analogous to turning inside out in the sense of oscillating between the large and the small (or in math language 1/epsilon and epsilon, in poetic terms, almost zero and its inverse).

whole/part, everything vs. one small part.


If there were 10,000 alien civilizations, but they are outside of our lightcone, we would not know about any of them, nor they us. Unless through a symmetry of the very large and the very small, we are all also in contact with everywhere at once.


If you understand that at all, it is a keeper.


gerry 3:09 AM

Hmm, maybe I can use this analogy to talk about how the levels of a system are related. To function, there are operational layers and actions the involve different subsets of the parts of the whole. Units at a level are sub-wholes with there own systems and logic. Sub-units are sub in that they provide signals and services to a higher (more to wholeness) level. A subsystem, being also a system, can have subsystems. systems with no subsystems are foundational, or basic.


If I can describe the idea of using category/type theory and relate it to the above logic, I can sell me as a lead of the team to make the software and tools to build some really cool and useful technology.


gerry 3:30 AM

What do you think about a VV collaborative fiction workshop? Found a collaborative writing cooperative/commons (first gen user/designers of CC tools)


VV collaborative systems building. Found the order of seagoing beaver to crew our new navy (to go after the whale, of course). The oceans of the mind our the destination for the OGS Pragma (Our Good Ship)


First voyage is covered on an on-line video-channel (network, not sure, so people can contribute clips and bits made all sorts of ways)


But also want to start people in a collaboration from a blank slate. Any suggested mission or course is in Flores lingo "conversation for possibility", fodder for further riffs and building up themes and more.


Peirce's three cats plus a more basic/universal one: zero. In category theory (math) terms, this is the additive identity (anything + nothing is same thing as before). Any actual nothing drifts into Peirce's firstness as a ground for a category of secondnesses. In category theory, functors embody thirdness.


gerry 4:09 AM

The original source of being is the great void, ain soph ? Which is archetypally the great original feminine symmetry of non-being. The groundless ground. What the turtles and the ouroboros emerge from. The great nothingness that isn't. Impossible to speak of, as soon as you say anything or even think to say anything or be anything. In Peirce, everything is a sign, in every theory, there is a ground ontology, something (a firstness) to build on. Before there are any signs, or even one sign, there must be a void that it is possible for anything to emerge within. We are trying to refer to what is beyond, outside, transcendent to that void. The impossible nothing, not any real nothing nor empty set of somethings. (edited)


gerry 4:49 AM

Can I blame all sorts of undercurrents of alternative thinking from New England on the Beavers? They could be responsible for Bowditch and Peirce? Emerson, Thoreau oh, and why not Melville to boot?


gerry 5:13 AM

In Introduction, chapter zero, I have to introduce the project that includes the others (at least 1, 2 and 3 tied to the progression of classes and small integer figures in maths and elsewhere. Need to set up why Peirce and apologize for not being yet deeper in his work. Why I think some of his methods of logic are much needed to resolve a lot of current paradox and show better what are the most promising ideas on the horizon. I want to connect Objects of different Ontological domains, not just take up with others are calling OOO, and alternatively speculative realism. I want to speak for Peirce's pair: logical realism and epistimological idealism (alternately as ontological idealism). Pairs and secondness should be deepened in 2ndness, these are the extremes of any dichotomy. Particles and spin networks are also here (2ndness shows its incompleteness and need for a relating element (thirdness of the Interpretant of the sign triad). The sign object is also 2nd position, the realness of things, their hard resistance to uncommitted thinking (vs. intentional thoughts as potential actions of agents). Thirdness drawing on all three parts is where essence touches the world. Essential patterns are brought to bear as agents to predict the future WRT intentional stances (I think it is reasonable to see Intention as arising out of a firstness associated with the self or soul, which is where god and spirit can act)


gerry 5:53 AM

Maybe I'm a horder of ideas (and stuff)


YouTubeYouTube | The New School

Artistry and Agency in a World of Vibrant Matter | The New School



gerry 6:00 AM

Of course, in Chicago, the Magnificent Mile was build on hoarding (sort of). Making money by taking in what is garbage to someone else. Note on emergence of Gaian systems, at first oxygen was a polutant made by photosynthetic bacteria, and burning carbon (as carbohydrates, primarily in the mitocondria of euchariotes) emerged to balance it. If we fail as this technological launch of a maybe next emergent (collective human organisms), the biosphere will regroup and incorporate what wisdom it can from what remains and can adapt.


gerry 7:41 AM

Can you help me explore the dimension of organic vs. ? artificial or synthetic? There is a book important to me, may still have copy: "Sciences of the Artificial" (close to that, Simon, I think), but the important idea I got from that is pretty much everything we see around us, the objectness of objects derives from man-made conceptions and systems. Even to the extent we use the products of nature (Gaia), it is man oriented. I would maintain that Peirce's logic and way of thinking is beyond this human-oriented conception of the objective. He never says who or what is doing the interpretation, being and actor/agent in any context or situation (in reality or in maths and logic). Implicitely it is within a language community (defining language as a system (conventional) of signs, a languages syntax, grammar, etc. are these conventions. Phonetics too, each a system with "general brain hardware" than implements it after training (childhood). AI systems are actually based on similar kinds of thinking. Only problem is "the limitations of formalism", which I would say from Peirce is his idea that generalities represented as rules (formal math, logical or scientific knowings, methods) are never complete (cover all possible cases). What is in OOO translated as "the object does not exhaust its possibilities". Note when formalized as in a particular instance of an Object Oriented Program (a kind of object with a lot of ontology of practice in computer science), the program will be less than the real objects represented, and by my cousin Murphy, the program will have bugs and might not work on Wednesday. By Turing and Church, you can't prove what every program does anyway (you don't even know what the formalism is, even with a working (or breaking) instance. Good luck simulating an actual brain even if you can extract all the parts and how they are connected. Maybe, but you have to do it to prove it, no handwaving or "mirical here" in your intuitive design. Or find enough intrepid voyagers and mates to find out one way or another.


gerry 7:46 AM

All projections of singularity in culture are bull. I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, we have a lot of design, architecture and engineering work to save the future for Gaians of all species. First on the planet and then maybe across the solar system. Good idea to work in near(ish) Earth space to establish substantial off planet operations in support of sustainable Terran cultures (economic networks of care commons). Care Commons can launch the first O'Neal Cylanders, rotating spacelifts, or whatever we can make work in mega-systems engineering. Only this time, this work must all be done in the service of the Open Gaian future.


Whether or not intended or even desired by the founders of Pragmatism or OOO, both need a "non-human turn" as some are saying. [ note to editor, these ideas are at the leading edge of the critical dialectic around these ideas. Like my thinking in religion vs. science, I want argue against anyone without a place for both sides and finding the middle in democratic process (all voices, no elites and no griefers either (people wanting to flip over all the tables))


gerry 7:58 AM

Thinking of a meme: Ante Future, like Ante Bellum (south), before the future in a new way the brings on good enough futures that best allow for human flourishing amid natural (all Gaian) flourishing. Even bring in the Mars mission types by saying they are dead and impoverished without a diverse, living Terran home system. That's going to be the source of many kinds of capital for a long time. The highest speed and most efficient link from colony to home is the data link. The question in the lifeboat colony case is 1) does global systems failure and unrest impact colonies and how, and 2) will the new Earth still be human habitable after failing the singularity test. If so, recolonization is possible, but better not forget how it all went down. Rememberence Education indeed (Dewey ref)


CC is a great concept for on and off planet colonizers. The floating mega structures would be loved by libertarian/anarchist who want to make there own governance systems without state restrictions. Of course, the colonizer dilemma is how to not follow a Jim Jones (note: examples could be like Trump, Hitler, Stalin, Putin, etc. but I like going with the real crazies to make the point (many right wing examples, getting FBI or cops to martre them, and no acknowledgement of connection by political polemics)


Compare: the story of the farm animal who loves the farmer and how he cares for them and feeds them, not knowing anything about "market day". Put that in your market fundamentalism and smoke it.


Debbie 8:20 AM

Spacing out. What is that neighborhood called along the lakefront? East of Michigan Avenue. Not Gold Coast. Where Northwestern Hospital and the campus is.






Streeterville is a neighborhood in the Near North Side community area of Chicago, Illinois, United States, north of the Chicago River. It is bounded by the river on the south, the Magnificent Mile portion of Michigan Avenue on the west, and Lake Michigan on the north and east, according to most sources, although the City of Chicago only recognizes a small portion of this region as Streeterville. Thus, it can be described as the Magnificent Mile plus all land east of it. The tourist attraction of Navy Pier extends out into the lake from southern Streeterville. The majority of the land in this neighborhood is reclaimed sandbar.Named for George Streeter, the neighborhood contains a combination… Show more(505 kB)

[ see Tim Morton: The Golden Stain of Time (almost references as "yellow" which might be part of a joke, no? ]

gerry 8:26 AM

Yes, the whole thing is a great Chicago story. Part of our "style", no? The world knows about Al Capone, but that is something, but not as big a thing as other things. Like that isn't most important Italian american from here, nor Daley's for my people (dad's side anyway). The French are way more "out there" culturally and the French in Canada and the U.S. also have tons of history and "entaglement" to use a popular term.


Debbie 8:27 AM



Debbie 8:40 AM

Catching up on what you slacked about synthetic etc

[ some good brain farts below -- capture this in your bin of creative musing about future bits and plots for GatW ]

gerry 9:16 AM

How about a "Winner take less" campaign? I think Anand G. and Michael Moore would love it. I want to be in a foursome with those two and someone good (celeb. or pro are both good, Tiger, MJ, any of them and raise big CC bucks on auctioning celebrity/pro groupings.) Rich suburban people will be all over it.


GatW, appearing and a beaver/golf cap ...


in a, not and a


Get rest of 4-some to join our new order of the beaver or whatever I called it above.


Hillarity ensues. Brings right sorts of attention to things.


Mind-ship telemetry goes in the caps.


Debbie 9:19 AM

Beaver hat.... Like Ed Norton and Ralph Kramden


gerry 9:20 AM

was that their lodge? They can have beaver trademark, MIT had it first


can't have


Might be a reason to actually have a class ring besides a way to hedge with gold :slightly_smiling_face:


weren' they raccoons? Also a smart animal, but not the builder/engineer that beavers are.


Debbie 9:22 AM

Raccoon Lodge


gerry 9:23 AM

hats may have been made from beaver with raccoon (decorative) tails.


Debbie 9:23 AM

Smart animal that goes after trash. And I wouldn't want to meet one in a dark alley or on the lakefront


That could be


gerry 9:24 AM

You know the story about when Ronnie and I nearly hit one riding home after fireworks?


He ran behind Ronnie and in front of me. IIRC


If you have cats in the remote burbs or country, a dog to chase Raccoons is good. I'd bet those Airdales (sp) are great for that. Keep them away from the bears, though. Chase bears with shotgun if need be.


Debbie 9:32 AM

I told you about the time we took Mac with us to this cabin in Wisconsin and he barked at the raccoon who was messing with our trash. "Let me out there to beat him up." Uh, Mac, that raccoon will have you for lunch.


gerry 9:33 AM

Not necessarily if he was still youngish. I doubt the raccoon would stay around. No animal wants a bad bite on either side. They respect the other's teeth.


also represented as Teddy R "Walk softly and carry a big stick" Cave man wisdom, behind it is that you let the aggressive ones wield the stick, you just carry it, and hope the animal never comes that close.


Early home art in the hunter gatherer town they dug up: people, in a way, taunting large prey. Probably representing a "bravery ritual" that helped get you a mate in your allied tribes.


Debbie 9:40 AM

Not sure you told me about that. Did I tell you about the last time Sue and I got together and we went to lakefront at Montrose and we saw a raccoon. She wanted to go up to it. I insisted on a safe distance. Thankfully she didn't go up to it.


Mac was very young then


gerry 9:41 AM

Same general area, we were near the Belmont walking and driving underpasses.


Debbie 9:42 AM

Yeah well we didn't want to take a chance. And raccoons have very sharp claws too as you know. re: Mac


gerry 9:42 AM

The reason we probably saw that one was all the traffic that night and that we were in a tight space between harbor and LSD, or at intake to it.


That one was a blur, not even time to really identify, but it had to be, size, speed and location wise


Not like the big buck I saw just standing their on the trail. Not afraid unless he spooked, a collision would not have been good for either of us, and I'd bet I would lose mostly


I just coasted and we looked at each other. Really cool in reality.


Another example of entaglement (animals and humans living together in a landscape, part natural and wild, part built up and gardened).


These concepts are central to a philosophy of general architecture of system that I want to create/join. Connected deeply to OR (operations research, whole lifetime design and systems understanding)


CC designs are "Cradle to Grave" in the best and most community comprehesive ways possible. Diversity by inclusion, dignity to be who we are to be and choose and become (along) with a community (or several intersecting ones).


Intersecting to link, not to exclude.


Debbie 9:50 AM

I remember you telling me about that


gerry 9:51 AM [ connects to agency of truth, the truths of racoons, pets and humans in interaction. Ideally, more social posturing (viseral language) than contact. This sort of example really brings out what the pragmatists are talking about. It doesn't matter what the other "animal" "thinks", just what they do. The bark really is worse than the bite because the contact (actual bite) is almost never beyond social signalling. A nip is a signal that it will hurt you as much as me if you proceed with this line of action, to trouble such discriptions as anthropomorphising is besides the point. There really are active agencies involved. You may dispute how conscious vs. automatic they are, free will vs. viserally determined, but this access is always there for all agents with or without agential awareness. Thus, what is the consciousness of collective entities like a culture's Gods? The agential impact of these Gods is real and true for believers. James wasn't saying spiritual belief is "true if it works in family/lineage survival", but that the spiritual impulse that we have as biological and cultural heritage empower the agency of said Gods in history. Nietzsche is not declaring God to be dead but lamenting it. Postmodernists are not be be blamed for modernisms failures. Latour maybe suggests we need to try again for a better modernity (ref: we have never been modern). Maybe the crew of various ventures like Gerry and his GSaC (Good ship and crew, a co-survival circle structure) are looking for a viable future to land the true modernity. We don't take for granted that in even exists, but 1) we will find it if it does, or 2) we'll adjust our destination (or our descriptions of it) and go at it again. Until the universe reveals itself to be ultimately futile and contrary to our efforts we carry on valiently ]


These stories are "true witnessings", we witness what we did and did not experience and what it means to us whether or not anyone else can confirm it.


Debbie 9:52 AM

I really do like this idea. [ note use reactions and other channel tools to note things you want to pin for use later ]


gerry 9:52 AM

What is there (social) purpose? (process arts/arch. question for inquiry)


I want to connect the truth of witnessing to firstness, and the object to be a first person story. What it means is socially defined (I liked the story or not). It means something important to me, which is why we are motivated to share.


Debbie 9:54 AM

Yes. We need to do more of that.


gerry 9:59 AM

[ the general topic here is the historicity of sense making. The sense of expressions drifts through time as different sense making systems (cultures) drift in different ways according to a self-referencing aesthetic. ]

When do you think human beings started doing that? Did our Neanderthal relatives? How about homo-erectus and other ancestors? These are all inquiries that new data and basic interpretation of the physical signs of the past in many very specialized fields. The amount of both data and derivative works, annalysis and assessments of data sets is astounding. VV subsystem: Open Data Commons as a shared resource. Shame institutions to share published papers of their professors in one or more open commons where independent researchers can buy access in CC and be rewarded for their work more easily. This is all "long tail" value being created and harvested by the tail and not the top 5-50. Having this character of distribution is very important to our economic modeling and more.


Not shame at first, invite and cajole, then scare them that their competition is doing it first. It's ok if you are telling the truth. You can soft-peddle what is really true, people intuit the truth both from the content and your confidence. You have to believe in yourself before you can get anyone else to do so.


The capitalists have to get finally that it costs more in the long run to even have the wiff of value-free evaluation for profitability. In the end, you can't just pretend to care. This is what the political operatives who are not sincere never get. Ideology is always trumped by a bigger heart, by true generosity. Just stick to the message and the intention even when we lose courage for a moment.

[ hmm, we seem to be getting better at making up, removed the back and forth, thanks for apologizing without much fuss ]

Debbie 1:48 PM

Fair enough. Yes, you're right. I should consider that more often. Sorry.

gerry 1:49 PM

It is reasonable that I ask you how I can make it stop. I'm not saying that I don't care about what I did, or that I may be off in my own ways, often am, just that I need to know what you need so you don't do that anymore.

Debbie 1:50 PM

I will give it some thought and figure out how best to express myself in regards to that.

gerry 1:50 PM

Help me coach you. Help me with coaching where it is my issues. We don't have to always find any fault or unique fault, as in "mistakes were made". Take responsibility as a way for you to grow in the context of the team, the partnership.

Debbie 1:51 PM

OK. I will think about how to best coach me. [ nice declaration, this is acknowledging it here because this is what makes the process work: Declaration (creates your identity) Acknowledgement (re-enforce the other's intentional creation of a positive identity and in effect, the acknowledgers declaration of support in the declarers promise -- results in interlocking promises and creation of a team (diad or larger community of mutual support. Note that I have said how this sort of architecture (social) is critical to CC designs. That's the origin of the IPAG wealing cycle. By creating tools (CC digital systems) that support CC practice (an evolving social network of caring practices), we are creating (ontologically) the concepts we are designing with. IPAG and wealing in communities becomes a thing by us doing it. The systems (CC digital) are secondary to the (social) process architectures, the people to people part of the design. The human agents as primary and constructive of collective (human) agencies. Is this not at the center of the futures we want to have? ]


gerry 1:51 PM

good process review is blameless and rankless. Not always easy in practice, but you must keep practicing.


In pragmatist approaches, it is all about the practice of general methods. Using best known methods, learning new methods and experimenting with new and evolved process. To say that a discipline is a practice is not that one is inexperienced (in need of more practice), but to acknowledge the role of continuous learning in any professional practice. If it were easy you wouldn't need experience and mentoring to get good.

gerry 1:55 PM

Developers are only taught skills and languages, not really a practice. MIT didn't really do that much better, but they have better starting materials.


gerry 1:56 PM

VV with radical pragmatist approach such as advocated and developed by Dewey and his followers can kick ass for the future.


Peirce never found a home in the stuffy halls of the Ivy Leagues on the east coast. Those who supposed themselves the high culture of america when the real work was being done by scruffy pragmatists developing a new way of being because they had to. We got this, we are from Chicago where we make the shoulders wide and strong to hold up a whole nation.


I don't blame you nearly as much as you project that I do. I'm more patient with you learning new practices than you are with yourself. Same goes for sonny boy and I need you to help me let him know that.


gerry 2:11 PM

Is it the world that is terrifying or we who are terrified of it? There was this odd small book mom got somewhere, probably self-published sort of thing. The basic message was that the world is a safe space, feel comfortable with your place it in.


gerry 2:22 PM

Thought experiment, it is possible, in other words there is a finite and likely very small probability that some cosmic or more local event could wipe out all life that we know of. Unless time is a lot more flexible than we think, such an event may have already happened in the relative past. That is to say, the event is outside of our "lightcone" and will predictably get to us in a fixed time that only depends on our position relative to the event in spacetime, the time for the even to evolve until the point in its future lightcone that will inevitably include us. This is a distant event, local events like asteroids or earthquakes or eruptions are probably more likely. Is it accident or some big-mind inner-outer effect like I wrote about above that makes us safe from an unexpected surprise end? In a meaningless (just dead material, little balls of stuff bouncing around) world God just rolls the dice and we are fated to the outcome and all of its meaningless contingency.


Debbie 2:24 PM

Tell that to a little migrant kid who has been taken away from family and in a cage. I doubt that little kid would feel like the world is a safe place.


gerry 2:24 PM

If this really is how things are, then existential absurdity is infinitely multiplied, and if not, then in the pragmatically infinite of the actual world, shouldn't it be teaming with life and intelligence of all sorts. It is truly absurd that we seem to be alone.


Debbie 2:25 PM

May be absurd but that is how I feel a lot of the time.


gerry 2:26 PM

Right, of course there is suffering. The karmic, existant aspects of the world such as it is are ontologically inseperable from the suffering of existing beings.


Debbie 2:26 PM [ pragmatists question is how do we do better. Chicago burned because until it did, there was insufficient appreciation of the risks and their nature. Good OR (operations research) can well address these sorts of things, but polititians and planners who are only rewarded for short term results cannot get others to pay attention to the long run over the short. Given enough time, all systems fail (cite Murphy, a Beaver from the Old Sod). The wise systems architect and engineer knows this and is never totally able to rest about whether he (or she) missed something important (like resonance effects Ref: Tacoma Narrows Bridge failure). You don't fault the engineers and architects for not knowing beforehand, but if they have other bridges extant, they become responsible for making sure they do the right thing WRT know risks. Risks that are now known because a bridge fell down or many died in a fire because the systems that should have protected them were not there. We know far to much about epidemiology to fail this way. The Chinese responded quickly once they knew about it, but their authoritarian system suppressed it an made if far worse for the entire world. The problem is that for the irony defficient classes, they want to blame the other (Chinese Flu cite articles on this maybe?) to cover up for their incompetence and authoritarian arrogance. Public comments that damage the sane public health response and actually make things worse. If anyone dare criticise they get publically slammed by the lie machine of one side. If working health officials are appauled by the public grand-standing how does one comment without being part of a political and deeply agonic exchange? Climate scientist face this same dynamic, how to tell the truth by the sandards of ones profession and not get slimed by the politics from one side or another. The public debate continues as if the truth is found by splitting the difference between warring factions. It isn't, it never was. Agonistic debate is a sign of weak arguments ]

I was just reading how we have learned nothing from the last pandemic in 1918.


gerry 2:28 PM

The wonder of the world (call it god if you will, but secular wonder is just as deep) does not seem to be absurd, or at least not only that. Our lot as mortals is to make what we can of the absurdity we find, make our own meaning if we find none outside of ourselves. We do, in fact, find something outside of ourself, the other, and the only proper relationship to have with the other is a loving one. That is what the nature of feeling safe is. Think of Job and his suffering too.


Debbie 2:29 PM

And that response doesn't respond to the idea that a little kid is in a cage and our government caused that and it's easy to say that the world is really a safe place if you have a roof over your head and your parents while not perfect are relatively OK to deal with. When I attend those rallies it's because I am thinking about those kids in cages and I feel helpless to change it.


OK. I can think of Job but then again I'm an adult.


gerry 2:31 PM

No, we have learned a lot. We knew almost nothing then. A more mild disease was much more devestating. It's just that we are now much more vulnerable. With 10billion souls alive and all the commerce and movement, the speed of a pandemic and the potential scale is much much greater. It isn't that we have learned nothing but that we are ever more challenged by the problems we create by our our activity. Such are the goods and bads of living in the Anthropocene.


Human beings are anti-fragile. It is still unspeakable that our government is doing this with knowledge and forthought at the will of a fearful majority who take for granted an undeserved advantage, but adversity makes us ever stronger.


gerry 2:38 PM

If any of us survive, the seeds of a new cultural flourishing will survive. Some anthropologists suggest we became smarter and more caring/cooperative in the most challenging environmental periods. That there is evidence of a time when humans almost all went extinct and the authors suggest maybe this sort of event would select for the most intelligent, creative and cooperative human beings alive. The wisdom to help any of your kind and even fellow species can only enhance a species survival chances. Competition to death makes no sense in the long haul. Getting by a choke point by killing off your brothers and sisters cannot be a wisdom (long range possibility) strategy.


Time wounds all heels. Really, in the end it kills them off.


Anything that exists must have a beginning and an end, the end is in the future. Even if time is infinite in both directions this will turn out to be true. Actual infinity is paradoxical fundamentally. Potential infinities are fine.



gerry 6:58 AM

If Doctrine is a sort of operating manual, then Heresy is having the audacity to check grammar and spelling.

gerry 7:45 AM, our mother institution at BS.VV So, the general strategy for VV launch is get get this meme going in MIT alums. Slowly at first is fine. Before the MIT admin hears about it I want underground videos from the steam tunnels. Ideally, they never hear of it. Transgressive projects are what we beavers call hacks. The greatest hacks have humor at the heart of them. GatW is all hack all the time. Sometimes the specticle erupts, but the beavers are conspiring to actually keep their identities secret. Names changed to protect the conspirators and keep the real story on the down low.


Debbie 8:37 AM


49 Henny Youngman Quotes - Inspirational Quotes at BrainyQuote

Enjoy the best Henny Youngman Quotes at BrainyQuote. Quotations by Henny Youngman, American Comedian, Born March 16, 1906. Share with your friends.



Rodney Dangerfield Was the King of One Liners

Rodney Dangerfield had captured the minds of his audience with his ribald, in-your-face humor. Read some of his best funny one liners.(35 kB),1)/LiveAboutDefaultShareImage-67fc6776ae1049f28fed94e0577b2f81.png


gerry 9:18 AM

I was remembering a great story of truth and beauty, told about how the people of a place react to them. As a fable with truth and beauty made into people, specifically both female. I hope I can find something like it, the punch line is something about how people can't take the truth in naked form: many results an first search, not finding it. Probably was on WB archives OUaT (once upon a time) a favorite introductory trope, no (to use favorite words in a sentence)


YouTubeYouTube | izi.TRAVEL

The Story of Naked Truth



gerry 9:23 AM

I think that is what I want from the prose style and voice we are in the process of designing and producing. A sense of story telling and tactical introduction of words and terms. Not so much defining, but pragmatically developing meaning in the relations of usage. Is that not what a jargon, or private (insider) language is? I intuit that this is an opportunity to develop a more conversational way of talking type theory. In other words, describe what you are doing, defining and intending in plain language, have tools (I will be using ML for machine learning in preference to AI as augmented or artificial, its all artificial if we designed and taught it from circuits up, question is what makes it really alive.


gerry 9:33 AM

Going from zero (introductory material that defines the nothingness that we will be putting furnature in). The idea that there is a total and generative nothingness that we can never describe (some notes on this above too) is not a Truth until some (fragmented) vision of the Final Interpretant of an inquiry into the nature of this thing we have created by the emergent magic of human dialectic. "What is the ultimate generative nothingness out of which the existant (empirically and phenominalogically real, measurement (secondness) and the observer (the monad of consciousness, firstness -- Peirce may not have liked how Leibniz talked about monadology, but is also real mathematical (topology) thing too). Note most of these maths are way after Peirce, but the precision of this logical and mathematical analysis suggest that a full expansion of the implications of his thought might yield metaphoric and analogous connections between these theory. Category (type) theory also holds promise in making more sense of categories and elemental relations of linguistics, psychology and in fact all fields via better whole systems modelling tools and descriptions. Instead of one discipline claiming to be fundamental over another, they stack and network into interlocking wholes.


gerry 9:40 AM

The new physical descriptions leave the space to do this with or without invoking magical ontologies, the question is only about the way in which a given ontology is real, they are all real within their private domains. Neither do we need an oppressive master narrative (doctrine) the has the authority to put down heresy (irruption of free choice and oppression when and where authority deems necessary). This is what defines oppression, which is not to grant universal freedom to act against convention, to drive on the wrong side of the road, or to be the being the wrong category for for a given road or thruway (note this does not but can imply a road for 100 ton vehicles (also could be a pedestrian or bicycle path)). Motor vehicle on the bike path or sidewalk, or pedestrian on the highway.


gerry 9:47 AM

In the USofA, your private religious beliefs are not of my business, until you trot them out into the public square, the agora, and tell me I must take your premises to be self evident. Rawles conceptualized this as "initial position" which is sort of a ground reference of Peircean firstness, but Peirce and I'm sure Dewey will insist that Democratic truth from an open secular process is the only good way to go in terms of political systems. Secular here doesn't mean non-religious, but not-religious. Not anti, but inclusive, pluralistic. The one paradox is the toleration of the intolerant, and I think here we just have to allow for pragmatic exception, good enough governance. The tolerant majority has to weight the cost of tolerating a few who might even conspire to do them in (collectively) so that their one view will "win out". Such a view is dangerous to democracy.


gerry 9:52 AM

Truth seeking, the work of philosophy, can't be agonic, a war of truth over falsehood. Errors and failure are merely mistakes. When civilizations fall it is because they have become to in love with the truth of the current order to see its cracks and failures. The philosopher is the one who keeps his or her eyes and mind alert to the signs of senisence of a systemic object becoming too old and weak to function. Or just being inflexible when the external catastrophe happens. We are the result of many accidents, whether they are happy or sad depends on who you are. That big asteroid was not so good for the dinasaurs, only the birds and crocks escaped from their lineage. Mammals then took the stage.


gerry 9:59 AM

How can I tell this story with some confidence? Reports from the leading edge of science. New finds of fossils and work to look at how the mammals emerged and evolved in the wake of that big event. I could link it here for an on-line mainly publication, there is an interactive site that lets you visualize the history of all the known groups of species as a tree and you can see the evolutionary distance between different groups interactively. Of course this is not reference data for a study, but illustrates a great way to communicate a lot of scientific data in a visual tool. As science literate people we understand the compromises that would have went into producing such a diagram as well as the history of earlier versions of similar graphics. This one is a lot better because of how much new data and science went into it, the old ones are like old maps that are only vague representations of the worlds they represent. Pragmatic question is, could you use them to help get around?


gerry 10:05 AM

In terms of human history and phenomenology, the map drawers and map users of old had none of the metal tools that all modern engineers and scientists take for granted. Look up the roundness of the earth and you will find several overlapping metric sciences and phenomenally (in the exceptionally awesome sense of it) accurate tools describing the exact shape of the earth. Probably people who came after Peirce in the Coast Survey work are part of all this. Flat earth indeed, not exactly round, nor oblate spheroid either. Let's just call it a large and evolving (getting more accurate and logging changes) information object. A knowledge base.


The world is now filling up with such objects. The ones coming off the LHC are scary large. Too big to move on the networks even in medium sized chunks. This means teams have to select and reduce data locally (in big multi-processor array super computers) and ship the reduced data around the network and share with colleagues.


This give a glimpse of just how complex creating my vision of an open data network would be. An object of true physical observations and more.


gerry 11:18 AM

Important subtheme, what is the reality of maths, of numbers. I say they appear as a tool for thinking. That is what they still are. No more, no less. Maths are not of the world but of the mind. All inquiry in any field that has anything to do with truth or truths.


Find out how a give field of practice uses the word true, and you will learn a lot of their ontology.


In vague and deep generality: may your aim be true. Compare with: may you hit your mark. A difference in aspect to the same even, no?


Q: is philosophy "situated" or free of time and space. A: Yes, but lets talk about it.


gerry 11:30 AM

We are from a time and place with a history and throwness, and philosophy is done on the stage of all the can possibly be known about and from application of the best knowledge making methods of one's time and place. Both/and existential objects are always specific, and don't have essenses, but instead only partake of them. Some truths, mathematical, philosophical and semiotic are grounded in the essential such that the temporal and local can be expressed for all time and place. The existential partakes in truth and beauty in this way, real existing objects express themselves in timeless essential relationships.


gerry 1:00 PM

A theory of truth has to account for competitive notions of the truth, my god(s) vs. yours. The status of the religion and gods of the other in a plural and secular space may be "up for grabs", but it doesn't mean anything goes. Latour and others speak of "transfomations" and "allies" WRT negotiations of agency. In my metaphoric intuitions such allies form networks of ontological transformations that can link different conceptions of the truth into coherent assemblages. (assemblage theory is another "thing" no unrelated to OOO and reconceptualizing of materialism in more open ways (i.e. ones I and G Harman likely do not disagree with).



The issue is really an exact dual to right to left (i.e. Hebrew and others) and left to right convention in text and in weaker way to which side of the road to use by default.


gerry 1:08 PM

Physics/math people might call these "broken symetries" just to confuse you further. The Red Queen (she's the one whose words means what she means them to, right) is an overly literal rhetoric major who is pissed off at the masters of abstractions (in CS we can be unmerciful in the creation of arbitrary convention without a clear grounding in any reference whatsoever). Math majors are too terse to be properly memonic, we prefer a sequence of words (foo bar baz waldo ... (there's a really long list some people memorize, a nerd thing like memorizing digits of pi) as apposed to x, y, z or A, B, C and so on.


The CS list are call "canonical meta-variables", the pattern is a set of meaningless symbols so you can refer to the same thing many times. Compare to pronoun meaning and "binding".


Debbie 1:17 PM --- I want to send an email to James Rudyk who works here and might potentially be interested in care currencies.


gerry 1:20 PM

You want to probe some for the language of different movements. Open money, community based financial institution and financing (like crowd funding, but better language ... they may have preferred language, this relates to alliance forming and learning how to translate.


Debbie 1:32 PM

Going to veg out for a short while and then get back to that website and send an email that will be well written.


gerry 1:32 PM



gerry 3:26 PM

21 Signs That You're an INTP, One of the Rarest Personality Types

The INTP is one of the rarest of the Myers-Briggs personality types, making up only three percent of the population. INTPs are known for their inventiveness and brilliant intellect.

Apr 23rd, 2018

(266 kB)

Gerry.....2020-03-24 09:50:04 UTC

{\displaystyle \varnothing }