Re: Spimes, Bruce Sterling, sustain vs enhance

[John M <***>]

Jack, thanks.
May I complete your wisdom with a side-track? See after your text as my
tuppence-apny
John M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Park" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Spimes, Bruce Sterling, sustain vs enhance


> Judith, Dan,
>
> I am pleased that wrangling spimes got read and got thoughtful comments
> in this forum. That's because I strongly believe that the generalized
> aims, mindsets, and passions of some people in this forum reflect a road
> ahead. Al Einstein is reported to have said something about not being
> able to solve tomorrow's problems with today's mindset. I'd like to
> think that holistic thinking, on just about any level, is the onramp to
> the road ahead, and that a more rigorous understanding of the real
> complexities of the situation, illuminated by spimes and their presence,
> is what's called for, is what's for dinner ;-)
>
> another 2cents.
> Jack
>
> Dan Fiscus wrote:
>
> > snip
JM:
not only holistic (I use: wholistic, to cut out the superstitious
connotations) thinking, but the mere verbal formulation - of these
future-thinking related ideas - is not feasible with today's words, as they
carry the load-meanings of the past. I was scolded on several lists (I
believe, this one included) to be "vague" - yes, no small wonder. Express
something of the future-thinking,  using words (terms, expressions,
connotations) of today (or better: yesterday - BC).
People have to learn "scientific humbleness" (I call it my scientific
agnosticism) and the words:
""I do not know"" - unspeakable in publicatory academia. It means bad
manners. It is
understandable: nobody ever got an award (MMOONNEEYY) or tenure for NOT
KNOWING.

That is the reason why quanitative formalism was invented, you can always
find a similar formula to match. I tried it once: a simple diffusional
surface-phenomenon showed up and (like numerology?) I browsed through the
'big books' for a "similar" formula and found that what I observed was
formally connectable with the "parachor" (you may look it up, a very obscure
characteristic, had nothing to do with what I was seeking) and was happy
(didn't publish it though. - I missed my Nobel.

You said Al Einstein? well, he was right in this.

Cheers

John M