Mark: Thank you for your response. Alas, what you have provided does not help me as much as I hope it would. I am like Joe M - I need help figuring this out. I am looking for your definition of the new paradigm and the old paradigm which the new one replaced. For me, the word “paradigm” is well defined by the following: paradigm (plural paradigms <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_paradigms-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=4YCTxbQFCbjGbD_CDMCxjTw51yoJgTyWpQkrKjbaKJ0&e=>) A pattern <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_pattern&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=O0AI2__8dl5U0tKfA8Dc4BpMdv3AyiNKkzPFxMQ63HY&e=>, a way <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_way&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=hZhs47l_4pGQjJGRBeYM7yVL26lgUxkQx1u2JlZGG1A&e=> of doing <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_doing&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=18m2MIAX_Eo_9N8lY5pjAQA9b_UsY32L2M5u6IfrvnQ&e=> something <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_something&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=srf_0qeU2aFdvSwpXZFjKOQ_vKtQvJr8tECYMpplljc&e=>, especially <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_especially&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=ZDJl6BIVxkxSw-xeljxgZWBt4_b3uFDi_-Sc90bHMcs&e=> (now often pejorative <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_pejorative&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=NDQCNiGwMEjvS0083cRR6SDGDG_5WLCOqQEZeKBr8Q8&e=>) a pattern <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_pattern&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=O0AI2__8dl5U0tKfA8Dc4BpMdv3AyiNKkzPFxMQ63HY&e=> of thought <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_thought&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=kxtXV951MHNWpdAAGyVigpP-pscfVZ5Nkg86vVZp6Cs&e=>, a system <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_system&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=upS3wT1oxKcdpUl7ONNU_b2cczosWkTKNi3SHlbk_8A&e=> of beliefs <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_belief&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=ertP49naCJQKqm4DtutObn8GGKQWDIiyNjxmMrF-oRg&e=>, a conceptual <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_conceptual&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=c7p-zt-G0yDVc5bMO8kGS-Qb5dTG_Jju6zkCplD_New&e=> framework <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_framework&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=YJCvDUJExhfrCXE3GIkeGKXpYpdIxyHXavZdsPraEBA&e=>. Synonyms: model <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_model-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=PX7vYmckhOlsZNrHcCgjEAj5_NB_-TsMmSKS0lOuuY0&e=>, worldview <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_worldview-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=Cvw_BlCKlfAd9xBcVilX12YC0mKf1k9t7A3K0So0NcI&e=> Thomas Kuhn's landmark “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” got people talking about paradigm shifts, to the point the word itself now suggests an incomplete or biased perspective. An example <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_example&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=SF4NfM4_JB3v5eGL1U2RpmEJdceVBKbqdhkyBYoUDw4&e=> serving as the model <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_model&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=xq_HGAqraTNpjkWSpEuIx8MqqVbRr9-ObFp1iEa3oo8&e=> for such <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_such&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=nxPoE1z11gE4-XfoKyoS2OXdhRfF3hXVewtFNDUqXdQ&e=> a pattern <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_pattern&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=O0AI2__8dl5U0tKfA8Dc4BpMdv3AyiNKkzPFxMQ63HY&e=>. quotations ▼ <> Synonyms: template <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_template-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=moHEj5_QH7kf8CW_1SWFfqG3DtgmwEumXpRgV5YB8ak&e=>, exemplar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_exemplar-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=n5-DoQhhM-bUWzOF0VRpRANn41AI55wa0vsU_S1QsCg&e=>, posterboy <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_posterboy-23English&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=QYr61CcvLSOWlYCXKrNWU1v8G_T9wgqQebD13IZSTQs&e=>. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_paradigm&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=weugqa_qL29jQFhuGS3UO7rg-fRBNgJXs5qrnfV2sH8&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiktionary.org_wiki_paradigm&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=weugqa_qL29jQFhuGS3UO7rg-fRBNgJXs5qrnfV2sH8&e=> For me, “paradigm” means a temporary, workable explanation for how or why, or both, a system works. It is not recognized as an “ultimate truth” but as a working understanding and includes the implication that further information or experience might modify the current paradigm or understanding. I appreciate that “paradigm change” is explicitly associated with a variety of “disturbances in the social fabric.” That is understandable, especially in terms of Henriques’ P + M -> E formulation. What I am looking for is the definition/description of the “new paradigm,” the “old paradigm,” and how they differ or are alike. Something like, for instance, the introductory paragraphs of a Wikipedia (or other encyclopedic work, such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, etc) article? Another example is the nature, similarity and difference between Newton and Einstein’s perception of gravity. Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD (Perseveret et Percipiunt) 503.631.8044 Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein) > On Jul 10, 2018, at 1:06 PM, Mark Stahlman <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Waldemar: > > Great idea -- so, what does "paradigm" mean to you . . . ?? > > Since the idea (in our context) comes from Thomas Kuhn, have you had a chance to read his book (written in 1958 and finally published in 1962)? > > I like to think of this in terms of what most people call "counter-cultures," a paradigm is a technology-driven shift of CULTURE (in the ToK Stack) and when one takes over from another, clashes are always going to happen. > > Since I'm 70 (born in 1948 in Boston, the same year my father graduated with a BS from MIT, on his way to an MA in Philosophy and PhD in History of Science), I was 19 years-old in 1967 when I bought a used Porsche 356C and drove it from Madison to Haight-Ashbury (then down the coast to see the Doors play at the Cheetah in LA). Now *that* was a counter-culture experience . . . <g> > > Today -- as reflected in all the political and economic &c upheaval (which Gregg seems very engaged with from what I saw on his site) and endless talk about the *robots* taking over -- we are in the middle of another one (which appear to happen every 50+ years nowadays, driven by new technologies). So, I'm not "predicting" so much as noticing what is already going on. > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nytimes.com_2018_07_09_books_review_future-2Dof-2Dwork-2Ddarrell-2Dm-2Dwest.html&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=0UR2VYwQ3vSQmQ-K5FB4WmZPxAqBWeJRccvT9-Sv7w8&s=aPRM31jMkEVpgc3_UEv5hnJS7fGdARhy658rxkeFOa8&e= > > This is what it feels like when a *new* paradigm (as I understand the term) takes over our lives and it feels like we're all along for the ride . . . !! > > Does that help? > > Mark > > Quoting "Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD" <[log in to unmask]>: > >> A suggestion: >> >> Perhaps, it would help if we had a brief definition, statement, or synopsis, of what: >> >> 1. John considers to be the central nature of the paradigm he is proposing. >> 2. Mark considers to be the central nature of: a. The new paradigm in which we find ourselves and b. The previous/old paradigm which was replaced by the new paradigm. >> >> That way we could be reassured that we are reading, thinking, talking, and writing about the same things. >> >> Best regards to all, >> >> Waldemar >> >> Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD >> (Perseveret et Percipiunt) >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 10:54 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> Thanks much for the stimulating contributions. I will offer some thoughts soon, so that perhaps we can sort out where it is where we are standing, both as a group and as individuals who have all been on long and intense journeys trying to figure out some of the most complex problems in philosophy. I think we all have interesting things to say. >>> >>> Warm regards to all! >>> >>> Best, >>> G >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 1:16 PM, Diop, Corinne Joan Martin - diopcj <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Mark, >>>> >>>> Thank you-- and thank you also for the correction! Cantor has emerged again in a small body of work I am doing on people named Georg(e/es), so I will be sure to look into this intrigue before exhibiting/writing about it again! (The others are Braque, Gurdjieff and Sand...) >>>> >>>> Corinne >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Mark Stahlman [[log in to unmask]] >>>> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2018 2:04 PM >>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>> Subject: Re: New Paradigms >>>> >>>> Corrine: >>>> >>>> Thanks -- fascinating and beautifully done . . . !! >>>> >>>> Small correction, if you don't mind. Galileo's astronomy didn't >>>> really "threaten" anything and his problems with the Church were quite >>>> different from the usual accounts, having more to with his anti-Rome >>>> Venetian backers (btw, my "godfather" Giorgio Desantillana wrote the >>>> one-time "definitive" work on the topic and my father helped to design >>>> what is now the Galileo Museum in Florence) and it was Cantor who >>>> approached Franzelin, who pretty much blew him off (i.e. the Church >>>> really didn't care what he was doing). >>>> >>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Crime-2DGalileo-2DGiorgio-2DSantillana_dp_0226734811&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=Bfq1ppMS3XgQnnQpYnIZ8wC_97XYRZJRxUuB1rAMdwc&e= >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> P.S. The usual reports about G. Bruno's troubles are also mistaken. >>>> It had little to do with his "heresy." In fact, as best as I can >>>> tell, he was an "agent" of the English spymaster Walsingham and was >>>> caught organizing against the Vatican. We often forget how much >>>> "intrigue" was going on in those days and how often Rome was on the >>>> receiving end (as well as dishing it out) -- plus how they were >>>> finally defeated in the mid-19th century after many centuries of >>>> declining influence. >>>> >>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Francis-5FWalsingham&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=IYy1BIydW2s5dWUnNTYIYOmAhcjKtdkXhsxHKkAcdVo&e= >>>> >>>> Quoting "Diop, Corinne Joan Martin - diopcj" <[log in to unmask]>: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Just sharing some of my artwork that relates a bit :) >>>>> >>>>> "Sizing the Infinite, Seeking Eternity," about Georg Cantor was >>>>> done in collaboration with E. Theta Brown, Associate Professor of Math >>>>> >>>>> Cover and pp. 11 – 16. (Photographs and essay.) >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__kapsula.ca_releases_KAPSULA-5FGOODMEASURE-5F3of3.pdf&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=BwEKKzPLdUHIfojBBcw4PN3O97YYW0fasOi23LN38O0&e= >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Corinne >>>>> >>>>> PS I have artwork about Gregg's ideas from some years ago that got >>>>> buried somewhere in my studio after a move-- when I unearth it I >>>>> will share! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Corinne Diop >>>>> Professor of Art >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_corinne.diop.studio_&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=KwQnikKeu_aL_IJaCKzcXiouQheSnbFsIVXtYmyKCZg&e= >>>>> >>>>> Photography Area Head >>>>> http://www.jmu.edu/artandarthistory/programs/Photography.shtml >>>>> >>>>> School of Art, Design, and Art History >>>>> MSC 7101/ 820 S. Main St >>>>> James Madison University >>>>> Harrisonburg, VA 22807 >>>>> [log in to unmask] >>>>> (540) 568-6485 >>>>> >>>>> ************* >>>>> JMU Safe Zone Member >>>>> http://www.jmu.edu/safezone >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion >>>>> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Mark Stahlman >>>>> [[log in to unmask]] >>>>> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2018 10:13 AM >>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>> Subject: New Paradigms >>>>> >>>>> John/Joe/Gregg &al: >>>>> >>>>> What Gregg has done here may be the *first* time this has ever been >>>>> accomplished (or perhaps even attempted). While many have >>>>> "philosophized" over all this, Gregg has actually assembled a group >>>>> of experts (which decades of detailed knowledge as well as >>>>> experience arguing with their domain-expert colleagues.) Hurray . . >>>>> . !! >>>>> >>>>> Tree of Knowledge Stack >>>>> >>>>> Culture :: Sociology (Joe) >>>>> Mind :: Psychology (Gregg) >>>>> Life :: Biology (John) >>>>> Matter :: Physics (???) >>>>> >>>>> Does the "lower" define the "upper" or are there new *principles* >>>>> that must be added at each level (or what Gregg calls "dimensions of >>>>> complexity") . . . ?? >>>>> >>>>> In the 19th-century, during what was a very different paradigm from >>>>> the one in which we live Bernhard Reimann suggested what some call >>>>> the "hypothesis of the higher hypothesis" and Georg Cantor generated >>>>> his Transfinite schema in attempts to *rigorously* tackle this >>>>> conundrum. Both of them have largely been forgotten today and this >>>>> was replaced with the notion of a "Theory of Everything" (ToE) and >>>>> "Unity of Science" (as per Carnap &al) in the 20th-century -- as a >>>>> result of the new paradigm in which those scientists lived (but not >>>>> the same one as ours). >>>>> >>>>> "Quantum" physics caught many people's attention and, for a while, >>>>> seemed to be the answer -- but then it failed to produce a ToE and >>>>> dissolved into a group of rival splinters until it was revived by >>>>> some "hippies" who were living under yet-another paradigm (yes, as >>>>> it turns out, I know Jack Sarfatti and he is an entertaining sorta >>>>> guy, whose ideas were enhanced by both some LSD and some >>>>> "conspiracies" that he imagines he was a part of) . . . <g> >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_How-2DHippies-2DSaved-2DPhysics-2DCounterculture_dp_039334231X&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=z21gNwg3Phhb8zDjPEWwYZZnnuOW0Vep1M486cPwhDQ&e= >>>>> >>>>> So much for physics -- but wait there is more! The US *military* >>>>> decided it wanted to take some Los Alamos bomb-desingers and shuffle >>>>> them across-the-street to a new place that was called the Santa Fe >>>>> Institute, to see if the physics of nuclear weapons (i.e. >>>>> mini-stars) could be applied to society. The Department of Energy >>>>> (which owns the US arsenal, not the service branches) initially >>>>> funded them 100% (and now it's 30% with another 30% coming from >>>>> Pierre Omidyar). >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.santafe.edu_&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=AWiCJq0W3SGK9QXs99_ukwq3kcCNbrSUTQmPezjvzTE&e= >>>>> >>>>> The result was "complexity science" -- re-branding "chaos," since >>>>> that frightens the children -- and its elaborate models of >>>>> "emergence." Some of us from the Center spent last Spring with >>>>> these folks (in particular, Jim Rutt, long-time chairman and now >>>>> trustee at Santa Fe) and I can tell you they don't have a clue (and >>>>> are unlikely to ever get one.) >>>>> >>>>> So, Physics as failed (multiple times). How about Biology or >>>>> Psychology or Sociology? As John tells us, biology is broken. As, >>>>> Gregg tells us, psychology is broken. As Joe tells us, sociology is >>>>> broken. So, what are we going to do . . . ?? >>>>> >>>>> My suggestion is that we take a look at *paradigms* behind these >>>>> approaches and their causes/effects. This is the study of the >>>>> "structure of scientific revolutions" (as per Thomas Kuhn, although >>>>> he never explained either the causes or effects) and, to accomplish >>>>> that task, we will need Marshall McLuhan -- which we will do when >>>>> Gregg returns. >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Structure-2DScientific-2DRevolutions-2D50th-2DAnniversary_dp_0226458121&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=Wjt2pfZZFEZZ8hHd1Gi8N-e6L0fJp0jNpkVaXTqhbOw&e= >>>>> >>>>> To do this, we will have to do something that has been "forgotten" >>>>> for 400+ years -- understand *formal* cause. Fortunately, Aristotle >>>>> is there to help us (since he's the one who came up with this idea >>>>> in the first place, 2500 years ago) and, even more fortuitously, we >>>>> are now in a new paradigm (otherwise, we wouldn't be having this >>>>> conversation). >>>>> >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>> P.S. The previous paradigm was characterized by "globalism" and what >>>>> was called the "new world order" (i.e. the one that Kuhn was >>>>> plumping for, as funded by the Ford Foundation) and it has now >>>>> collapsed. Yes, this is what keeps Henry Kissinger awake at night. >>>>> This is why Trump was elected, Briexit occured and the 5 Star >>>>> Movement now runs Italy &c. This is also why we are now in another >>>>> "counter-culture" (parallel to the 60s), since that's what happens >>>>> to *culture* when paradigms shift (over-and-over, making its >>>>> explanation a top priority for a "pure" sociology). This is the >>>>> focus of my Center (and,, yes, I also know John Ralston Saul). >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Collapse-2DGlobalism-2DJ-2DR-2DSaul_dp_1786494485&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=4kvjg0j27G60OZOmJLQm4GmRSyKFwNZpRY6JwkeZ9WY&e= >>>>> >>>>> P.P.S. The "cheerio conspiracy" in all this is that the *center* of >>>>> maintaining that now obsolete paradigm was the Government >>>>> Communications Head-Quarters (GCHQ) which is the foundation of what >>>>> some now call the "Deep State." Edward Snowden had a lot to say >>>>> about them in terms of their acronym, "Five Eyes," making Trump's >>>>> upcoming meeting with the Queen very interesting -- since the "Deep >>>>> State" actually reports to her (yes, making Canada an actual >>>>> national security threat) . . . !! >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Five-5FEyes&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=s3ScNTD00fGwqUNtQsPGQEQcsbcSOwQaTNEYyxaajZA&e= >>>>> >>>>> P.P.P.S. Since our confusion about all this has been going on for a >>>>> long-time, we will have to "drop back" and try to recover what >>>>> previous paradigms -- such as the "Enlightenment" &c -- have >>>>> destroyed. That is the origin of the "motto" on the Center website >>>>> that "Digital *retrieves* the Medieval" and, from ISIS reviving >>>>> *medieval* Jihad, to the Chinese reviving the *medieval* "Silk >>>>> Road," it is already the world in which we live. As Marty McKly put >>>>> it, "Doc, it's time to go back to the future" . . . <g> >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Back-5Fto-5Fthe-5FFuture&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=B4o24kuAh19SX2ks1cGJ_arOZDTP30QffE62ZH6ORwI&e= >>>>> >>>>> P.P.P.P.S. What we have to try to avoid, as difficult as it may be, >>>>> is to not behave "like a drunk looking for our carkeys underneath >>>>> the streetlamp, because that's where the light is." The recently >>>>> past paradigms have seriously screwed us up. This is why we are in >>>>> such terrible condition -- which, btw, is not the situation in >>>>> China, where its historic civilization is now the focus of study at >>>>> the Central Party School (where CPC cadre are trained in Beijing) -- >>>>> and *all* of our attempts at "coherence" have failed. But, we're in >>>>> luck, Aristotle is there to help us (which is why Summer School at >>>>> the Center is teaching his 4th-century BC "On the Soul".) >>>>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Soul-2DMemory-2DRecollection-2DAristotle_dp_1888009179&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=8qMQODcDkzHIMIPWHwejYDRD8zDMlzuSjEgeHBa8lGA&s=tcrM699HyAbsXoXcHy52dE-oXdz66F8YcxXYBoZt4iY&e= >>>>> >>>>> ############################ >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: >>>>> mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: >>>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 >>>>> >>>>> ############################ >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >>>>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>>> or click the following link: >>>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 >>>> >>>> ############################ >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >>>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>> or click the following link: >>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 >>>> >>>> ############################ >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >>>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>> or click the following link: >>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 >>> >>> ############################ >>> >>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >>> or click the following link: >>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 >>> >> >> ############################ >> >> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >> or click the following link: >> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: > write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > or click the following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1