tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-137558102024-03-27T16:54:34.152-07:00QuotesJP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comBlogger781125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-37600779442698778652024-03-24T16:39:00.000-07:002024-03-24T16:39:48.054-07:00If ChatGPT can do it, and if the purpose is learning, it’s not worth doing<p> --- John Warner, in <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/blogs/just-visiting/2024/02/05/ai-cant-read-why-pay-attention-its-feedback-writing" target="_blank">On AI and ‘Meaningful’ Feedback</a>, Inside Higher Ed, Feb 2024</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-54094917847335785802024-03-13T10:17:00.000-07:002024-03-25T08:55:56.806-07:00... that great LEVIATHAN ... that Mortall God, to which wee owe ... our peace and defence<p>--- Thomas Hobbes, <i>Leviathan </i>(1651) (<a href="https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/3207" target="_blank">on gutenberg.org</a>), h/t David Runciman, <i>The Handover</i> (2023:34) for the reference.</p><p>Note the group agency implied by "or upon one Assembly of men, that may reduce all their Wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will."</p><p>Excerpt</p><p></p><blockquote><p><b>The Generation Of A Common-wealth</b></p><p>The only way to erect such a Common Power, as may be able to defend them from the invasion of Forraigners, and the injuries of one another, and thereby to secure them in such sort, as that by their owne industrie, and by the fruites of the Earth, they may nourish themselves and live contentedly; is, to conferre all their power and strength upon one Man, <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">or upon one Assembly of men, that may reduce all their Wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will</span>: which is as much as to say, to appoint one man, or Assembly of men, to beare their Person; and every one to owne, and acknowledge himselfe to be Author of whatsoever he that so beareth their Person, shall Act, or cause to be Acted, in those things which concerne the Common Peace and Safetie; and therein to submit their Wills, every one to his Will, and their Judgements, to his Judgment. This is more than Consent, or Concord; it is a reall Unitie of them all, in one and the same Person, made by Covenant of every man with every man, in such manner, as if every man should say to every man, “I Authorise and give up my Right of Governing my selfe, to this Man, or to this Assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy Right to him, and Authorise all his Actions in like manner.” This done, the Multitude so united in one Person, is called a COMMON-WEALTH, in latine CIVITAS. This is the Generation of that great LEVIATHAN, or rather (to speake more reverently) of <b style="background-color: #fff2cc;">that Mortall God, to which wee owe under the Immortall God, our peace and defence</b>. For by this Authoritie, given him by every particular man in the Common-Wealth, he hath the use of so much Power and Strength conferred on him, that by terror thereof, he is inabled to forme the wills of them all, to Peace at home, and mutuall ayd against their enemies abroad.</p></blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-49139004640485766882024-03-06T10:36:00.000-08:002024-03-06T10:36:05.777-08:00The object isn't to make art, it's to be in that wonderful state which makes art inevitable<p>--- painter <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Henri" target="_blank">Robert Henri</a>, quoted passim, couldn't find source</p><p></p><blockquote> “The object isn't to make art, it's to be in that wonderful state which makes art inevitable.”</blockquote><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3JvbqcUoFfEezB30R8yql2PgJRJNeKpTC2TSWK1DUL0adCPgEkeLBzyId5dfsCXRMuJwrMJWhqy_e-xxlGkoG7u55EiWgheRmEno5aNm1aKmA7L88SdLjv7KhvPEiVxj7ypcmuT7JyxkU7jBHn9HVmuJ7uYCVXlqhAOdZC4ZLxex5YiKTdgjg/s2701/Robert_Henri_1897.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2701" data-original-width="1283" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3JvbqcUoFfEezB30R8yql2PgJRJNeKpTC2TSWK1DUL0adCPgEkeLBzyId5dfsCXRMuJwrMJWhqy_e-xxlGkoG7u55EiWgheRmEno5aNm1aKmA7L88SdLjv7KhvPEiVxj7ypcmuT7JyxkU7jBHn9HVmuJ7uYCVXlqhAOdZC4ZLxex5YiKTdgjg/w304-h640/Robert_Henri_1897.jpg" width="304" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-80553504634626031222024-01-29T10:33:00.000-08:002024-01-29T10:33:22.286-08:00we control nothing but we influence everything<p>--- <a href="https://brianpklaas.com/" target="_blank">Brian Klaas</a>, political scientist, in conversation with Russ Roberts on the Econtalk podcast, episode <a href="https://www.econtalk.org/if-life-is-random-is-it-meaningless-with-brian-klaas/" target="_blank">If Life Is Random, Is It Meaningless? (with Brian Klaas)</a>, Jan 22, 2024, about his book <i>Fluke</i>.</p><p>From the transcript:</p><p></p><blockquote><p>But it's also something where it's derived from a sense, for me at least, that, if the world is intertwined in this way and if our lives can be swayed by forces seen and unseen, sometimes random, sometimes small, we have a little bit less control than we think we do. Right? And, I think we're sold this world where, like, you are in control. Right? So, the self-help industry is basically an industry that tells you, 'It's your fault you're not happy, because here's the recipe to being happy and wealthy and so on.' And, the world just doesn't work that way.</p><p>And I think it lets us off the hook a little bit. I think that's the other aspect of this that I find helpful, is--I repeatedly use this quote, and it's sort of this idea that <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>we control nothing but we influence everything</b></span>. And, when you start to think about it that way, combined with the aspects of what you just read, I think it lets humanity sort of be a little bit messy and be a little bit imperfect. And it's okay.</p></blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-47611260308526116882024-01-11T11:54:00.000-08:002024-01-11T15:46:29.782-08:00[Better] to pretend that these books already exist, and then to offer a résumé, a commentary.<p>--- Jose Luis Borges, Prologue to <i>The Garden of Forking Paths</i>, in <i>Ficciones</i>, edited and with an introduction by Anthony Kerrigan, Grove Press (New York), (1941, 1962:15)</p><p></p><blockquote>The composition of vast books is a laborious and impoverishing extravagance. To go on for five hundred pages developing an idea whose perfect oral exposition is possible in a few minutes! <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>A better course of procedure is to pretend that these books already exist, and then to offer a résumé, a commentary.</b></span></blockquote><p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ckd025R7zoRDAK8FUAbLTXxXebf46bt9EnbA8R58Lf3ckShcWy54gpkUvj0M5cJkGOFwUvgtAMZS22ganvIgaZ_SdhVo-UaP8RhXGsHS002FtYZJbumO3XDgNGuO77xGEhHtpQKfQotk-MeOB6d6EAhGEojzAzOllGKfXx0yJZMJRGGjoomR/s1400/borges%202131485147006_XXL.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1400" data-original-width="1400" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ckd025R7zoRDAK8FUAbLTXxXebf46bt9EnbA8R58Lf3ckShcWy54gpkUvj0M5cJkGOFwUvgtAMZS22ganvIgaZ_SdhVo-UaP8RhXGsHS002FtYZJbumO3XDgNGuO77xGEhHtpQKfQotk-MeOB6d6EAhGEojzAzOllGKfXx0yJZMJRGGjoomR/s320/borges%202131485147006_XXL.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><p></p><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-7553881187931427222024-01-03T10:00:00.000-08:002024-01-03T10:00:05.007-08:00What is presented as a list of unimpeachable virtues and laudable goals is in practice a web of contradictions<p> --- A.O. Scott, in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/03/books/review/claudine-gay-harvard-resignation-letter.html" target="_blank">The Word That Undid Claudine Gay</a>, <i>New York Times</i>, Jan 3, 2024</p><p>Excerpt</p><p></p><blockquote>“These last weeks,” Dr. Gay writes, “have helped make clear the work we need to do to build that future — <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">to combat bias and hate in all its forms, to create a learning environment in which we respect each other’s dignity and treat one another with compassion, and to affirm our enduring commitment to open inquiry and free expression in the pursuit of truth</span>.” This sentence echoes the Harvard Corporation’s gusty roster of commitments, improving the syntax and the prose rhythm. Those infinitives stack up nicely. It sounds like a lot of work, but how can anyone be against any of it?</blockquote><p></p><p></p><blockquote>The real question, though, is how one institution can be for all of it. Is this work the university is really equipped to do? Combating bias may involve constraining open inquiry; free expression is not always respectful or compassionate. The pursuit of truth may outrun everything else. This cascade of noble imperatives can be read descriptively, as a diagnosis of the causes of campus turmoil. <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>What is presented as a list of unimpeachable virtues and laudable goals is in practice a web of contradictions</b></span>.</blockquote><p></p><p><br /></p><p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjbmHVy1i4ROkveA1MbTd9tF37I30jwTby0NpR_j7Ft6gvL4oPX-ysYGZitMArQPEn3yr0AB_n9Lp0ukCOJ3v7-FDWSqaJepc7JqzAklzdbdDSSpkMl1mVPhO-zJ3U6TVrM_Vj1KE0I8IcATunPnXvR8APEmPqb-1Gi0x28VKmuQi4gtIKwC5Vm" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1365" data-original-width="2048" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjbmHVy1i4ROkveA1MbTd9tF37I30jwTby0NpR_j7Ft6gvL4oPX-ysYGZitMArQPEn3yr0AB_n9Lp0ukCOJ3v7-FDWSqaJepc7JqzAklzdbdDSSpkMl1mVPhO-zJ3U6TVrM_Vj1KE0I8IcATunPnXvR8APEmPqb-1Gi0x28VKmuQi4gtIKwC5Vm" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dr. Claudine Gay at a Hanukkah candle-lighting ceremony in Harvard Yard in December 2023. <br /><i>Adam Glanzman for The New York Times</i></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-42371370141420804832023-12-15T18:46:00.000-08:002023-12-15T18:46:19.749-08:00organizations [...] produce designs which are copies of [their] communication structures (Conway's Law)<p>--- Programmer <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melvin_Conway" target="_blank">Melvin Conway</a> (1968), in How do Committees Invent?, <i>Datamation</i> <b>14</b> (5): 28–31 [<a href="https://www.melconway.com/Home/pdf/committees.pdf" target="_blank">pdf</a>] (h/t John Helm, see also Wikipedia, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway's_law" target="_blank">Conway's law</a>)</p><p>Conclusion of the Datamation article</p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><blockquote><p class="MsoNormal">The basic thesis of this article is that<b style="background-color: #fff2cc;"> organizations which
design systems (in the broad sense used here) are constrained to produce
designs which are copies of the communication structures of these
organizations</b>. We have seen that this fact has important implications for the
management of system design. Primarily, we have found a criterion for the
structuring of design organizations: a design effort should be organized
according to the need for communication.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">This criterion creates problems because the need to communicate
at any time depends on the system concept in effect at that time. Because the
design which occurs first is almost never the best possible, the prevailing
system concept may need to change. Therefore, flexibility of organization is
important to effective design.<o:p></o:p></p><p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal">Ways must be found to reward design managers for keeping
their organizations lean and flexible. There is need for a philosophy of system
design management which is not based on the assumption that adding manpower
simply adds to productivity. The development of such a philosophy promises to
unearth basic questions about value of resources and techniques of
communication which will need to be answered before our system-building
technology . can proceed with confidence.</p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p>Conway's Law is sometimes invoked in the slogan, “Don’t ship the org chart” (see, e.g., Marcelo Calbucci <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/marcelocalbucci_dont-ship-the-org-chart-is-a-myth-it-activity-7140770306805096451-19Og?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop" target="_blank">post on</a> LinkedIn).</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhhb3JRRMtUb2aV4IYN2MvmxT42iWnGp4O8eDtNVb_ZDhripVvs6Hmbj4OddsN5MUx_hppuvJzcfTx34PJyhnqQ4r6FsgnQKOr54GxdumcbQCpFjcsxOuIY3h9DnhaVQiGgJ19DujoMvX8Zq11cU7R83r4G79cxEZOIAP3rMBB3dlxDkpeLkrvy" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="507" data-original-width="314" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhhb3JRRMtUb2aV4IYN2MvmxT42iWnGp4O8eDtNVb_ZDhripVvs6Hmbj4OddsN5MUx_hppuvJzcfTx34PJyhnqQ4r6FsgnQKOr54GxdumcbQCpFjcsxOuIY3h9DnhaVQiGgJ19DujoMvX8Zq11cU7R83r4G79cxEZOIAP3rMBB3dlxDkpeLkrvy" width="149" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p> </p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-90090999174736513572023-12-11T08:06:00.000-08:002024-01-11T17:55:13.966-08:00Metaphysics is the art of bamboozling people methodically<p> --- Physiologist A. V. Hill, quoted by his grandson Nicholas Humphrey, "How did consciousness evolve?," Royal Institution lecture, Sep 21, 2023, at <a href="https://youtu.be/9QWaZp_2I1k?t=73" target="_blank">1:13</a></p><p>From the video</p><p></p><blockquote>His field was biophysics. Mine is psychophysics, verging on metaphysics. Grandpa Hill was a down to earth a scientist as they come. He once gave me his definition of metaphysics. "Metaphysics," he said, "is the art of bamboozling people methodically."</blockquote><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvZUr91-HiVz3MUzZy1ml-Uy4gGo522UpOnKwxKH8Myq1YaA95HomzZM3oqWePomw5TflTSIYNaM3XpB67X_GP00mrh00mX7fwaiwB5dtb1QmI_nfTREmfMp9vCRjZgw_8sGa_yZHf39XG3pN3vdISNzZIM9G22pMmhS6lLFeGnGQ4FaJfQiyP/s900/hill%20av-hill-english-physiologist-science-source.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="788" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvZUr91-HiVz3MUzZy1ml-Uy4gGo522UpOnKwxKH8Myq1YaA95HomzZM3oqWePomw5TflTSIYNaM3XpB67X_GP00mrh00mX7fwaiwB5dtb1QmI_nfTREmfMp9vCRjZgw_8sGa_yZHf39XG3pN3vdISNzZIM9G22pMmhS6lLFeGnGQ4FaJfQiyP/s320/hill%20av-hill-english-physiologist-science-source.jpg" width="280" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Judging by the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Hill" target="_blank">Wikipedia entry</a>, Hill was amazing:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>He graduated from Trinity College, Cambridge as third wrangler in the mathematics tripos.</li><li>In his very first publication (1909), while still an undergraduate, he derived what became known as the Languir equation (1918).</li><li>He was a crack shot.</li><li>During a home leave in WW I in 1915, he proposed a two-mirror method to determine planes' heights and then assembled a team to calculate the required data tables.</li><li>He shared the 1922 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.</li><li>In 1935 he served with Patrick Blackett and Sir Henry Tizard on the committee that gave birth to radar. </li></ul></div><div> <p></p><p></p></div>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-1085643983203685182023-12-07T14:19:00.000-08:002023-12-07T14:19:47.692-08:00We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us<p>--- Winston Churchill, speech as Prime Minister to the House of Commons, October 1943, Hansard, <a href="https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1943/oct/28/house-of-commons-rebuilding" target="_blank">HC Deb 28, volume 393, cc403-73</a> (accessed hansard.millbanksystems.com on December 7, 2023), cited by QuoteInvestigator, <a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/06/26/shape/#68501009-5b73-4a3c-8650-8f1eddcea749" target="_blank">Quote Origin: We Shape Our Tools, and Thereafter Our Tools Shape Us</a>, June 26, 2016 (accessed on December 7, 2023)</p><p>From Hansard</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;">I beg to move, "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider and report upon plans for the rebuilding of the House of Commons and upon such alterations as may be considered desirable while preserving all its essential features." On the night of 10th May, 1941, with one of the last bombs of the last serious raid, our House of Commons was destroyed by the violence of the enemy, and we have now to consider whether we should build it up again, and how, and when. <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us</b></span>. Having dwelt and served for more than 40 years in the late Chamber, and having derived fiery great pleasure and advantage therefrom, I, naturally, would like to see it restored in all essentials to its old form, convenience and dignity.</p></blockquote><p>QuoteInvestigator goes on to describe related quotes:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Henry David Thoreau, "But lo! men have become the tools of their tools ."</li><li>John M. Culkin in “A Schoolman’s Guide to Marshall McLuhan”, "We shape our tools and thereafter they shape us."</li><li>William J. Mitchell, "Now we make our networks and our networks make us."</li></ul><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi6pw0EkqtE-vcRG_q0afNycLiKgWRHTKk6vnav6RIpvlzsGznYVCjdQZ7hsoqnScWUCWd6PNIx2X0lg8LJO-0oUCVTYzttt_4lnVqMj2rjKXOJyOjJWsY66WjlYu3phBq8DT0soEQyZIe7Px3yMSTvu5AtslmPH2VnVOCb5jtaCTp7LVE8hzPo" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="750" data-original-width="900" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi6pw0EkqtE-vcRG_q0afNycLiKgWRHTKk6vnav6RIpvlzsGznYVCjdQZ7hsoqnScWUCWd6PNIx2X0lg8LJO-0oUCVTYzttt_4lnVqMj2rjKXOJyOjJWsY66WjlYu3phBq8DT0soEQyZIe7Px3yMSTvu5AtslmPH2VnVOCb5jtaCTp7LVE8hzPo" width="288" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-59539471557334304072023-12-07T11:54:00.000-08:002023-12-07T11:54:32.265-08:00the more science and technology succeed, the more opaque and obscure they become<p>--- Bruno Latour, in <i>Pandora's hope: essays on the reality of science studies</i> (1999: 304), cited in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboxing" target="_blank">Blackboxing</a>, <i>Wikipedia</i>, accessed 7 December 2023</p><p>Wikipedia cite:</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;">[Blackboxing is] the way scientific and technical work is made invisible by its own success. When a machine runs efficiently, when a matter of fact is settled, one need focus only on its inputs and outputs and not on its internal complexity. Thus, paradoxically, <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>the more science and technology succeed, the more opaque and obscure they become</b></span>.</p></blockquote><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-34069815256630700972023-12-03T13:57:00.000-08:002023-12-03T16:52:58.179-08:00Desire is the presence of absence<p>--- <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Koj%C3%A8ve" target="_blank">Alexandre Kojève</a>, quoted by Samantha Rose Hill in "<a href="https://aeon.co/essays/the-philosophical-legacy-of-alexandre-kojeve" target="_blank">The scar of identity</a>," Aeon, 21 March 2023</p><p>From Hill's piece:</p><p></p><blockquote>Instead of Hegel’s roundabout of self-consciousness that exists in itself and for itself but always and only in relation to another, Kojève gives us: self-consciousness is the I that desires, and desire implies and presupposes a self-consciousness. Thinking about the relation between the finite mind and Absolute knowledge is opaque, but desire is human. People know what it feels like to desire, to want, to crave to be seen, to feel understood. Desire is the hunger one feels to fill the absence inside themselves. Or, as Kojève put it: ‘<span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>Desire is the presence of <i>absence</i>.</b></span>’</blockquote><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjzpbDiNXFoGh6RBDzE_t5QDE0LJKYeoOEmz35vVsD_dUF3836GtqdFplAyFuE7GM0_I7MlVbHwPLCqekbsF7J0liD5LFCoqjwUzVZZG1h1km3cvffYBn6kvLzxitMhf29rZRidRM3i-ElHO5e30WMvB15Ssw0eEWmoF0Noy4FInbdhAnHHfKVJ" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="1706" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjzpbDiNXFoGh6RBDzE_t5QDE0LJKYeoOEmz35vVsD_dUF3836GtqdFplAyFuE7GM0_I7MlVbHwPLCqekbsF7J0liD5LFCoqjwUzVZZG1h1km3cvffYBn6kvLzxitMhf29rZRidRM3i-ElHO5e30WMvB15Ssw0eEWmoF0Noy4FInbdhAnHHfKVJ" width="320" /></a></div><br /> <p></p><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-43026468634936909752023-11-23T11:07:00.000-08:002023-11-23T11:09:14.021-08:00The struggle between 'for' and 'against' is the mind's worst disease<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sengcan" target="_blank">Sēngcàn (Seng-ts'an)</a>, quoted by Jonathan Haidt in <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_the_moral_roots_of_liberals_and_conservatives/transcript" target="_blank">The moral roots of liberals and conservatives</a>, TED2008, 15:28 </p><p>From Haidt's talk</p><p></p><blockquote>If you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be 'for' or 'against.' <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">The struggle between 'for' and 'against' is the mind's worst disease</span>.</blockquote><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjD0kOjgh5U376qOl_658_KuKgKbMuG-araSHaxa1qsUmmEEn-J7nJdAsyt6P4ZHlQ6Hnfo6GJJxEmatRfzTp8iT9K17kcMSpNgohPNir6pRDzZxxk8lLq2gtxmzk8H9Sk8tfox9DEUdkidd8l9_6uXy3259KnqTNuRN9B_8W8qBKSI-OpOCn-S" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="488" data-original-width="450" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjD0kOjgh5U376qOl_658_KuKgKbMuG-araSHaxa1qsUmmEEn-J7nJdAsyt6P4ZHlQ6Hnfo6GJJxEmatRfzTp8iT9K17kcMSpNgohPNir6pRDzZxxk8lLq2gtxmzk8H9Sk8tfox9DEUdkidd8l9_6uXy3259KnqTNuRN9B_8W8qBKSI-OpOCn-S" width="221" /></a></div><br />Image source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sengcan.jpg<p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-23854685342473443052023-11-15T15:27:00.000-08:002023-11-15T15:27:57.827-08:00travellers do not produce railways, but, conversely, railways produce travellers<p> --- Theodor Herzl, The Jewish State (1946, 1988), in a section titled "Demand, Medium, Trade" (h/t Matt Nesselrodt). From <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25282">Gutenberg.org</a>: </p><p></p><blockquote>In the earliest period of European railway construction some "practical" people were of the opinion that it was foolish to build certain lines "because there were not even sufficient passengers to fill the mail-coaches." They did not realize the truth—which now seems obvious to us—that <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>travellers do not produce railways, but, conversely, railways produce travellers</b></span>, the latent demand, of course, is taken for granted.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-39061037692466263542023-11-07T13:41:00.002-08:002023-11-08T09:28:34.636-08:00“Try my chat app” becomes the new “check out my podcast”<p> Jeff Homes tweet, <a href="https://twitter.com/Jeff_Holmes/status/1721720137286386056">https://twitter.com/Jeff_Holmes/status/1721720137286386056</a> (h/t Paul Diduch)</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi6w3eiUUPv807JbtYRwM2pFJDh-xb_9sunL0YtKXwX-YItlbsJZvU4_v1NCssph6KejLqaU8s63gGcqgpsMnOKm7n5PN39Fo5Nig9gfHFC_fV6yKqhH4TjM1TB6u3xO2LicQe11Bcu7j3kdiuu-DTUAv9tyWCkCkZRj_y3dizS8NpsfYqzAR1U" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="745" data-original-width="593" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi6w3eiUUPv807JbtYRwM2pFJDh-xb_9sunL0YtKXwX-YItlbsJZvU4_v1NCssph6KejLqaU8s63gGcqgpsMnOKm7n5PN39Fo5Nig9gfHFC_fV6yKqhH4TjM1TB6u3xO2LicQe11Bcu7j3kdiuu-DTUAv9tyWCkCkZRj_y3dizS8NpsfYqzAR1U=w509-h640" width="509" /></a></div><br /><br /></div><br /><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-18539513317562751802023-11-07T12:47:00.001-08:002023-11-07T12:47:29.921-08:00It’s not what you say; it’s what people hear that matters<p>Frank Luntz, <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/interviews/luntz.html" target="_blank">Interview</a>, <i>PBS</i>, 15 December 2003, quoted by Galen Strawson, "Blockers and laughter: panpsychism, archepsychism, pantachepsychism" 2024 (<a href="https://www.academia.edu/108965292/Blockers_and_laughter_panpsychism_archepsychism_pantachepsychism_draft_forthcoming_in_revised_and_expanded_second_edition_of_Consciousness_and_its_Place_in_Nature_ed_A_Freeman_Exeter_Imprint_Academic_2024?email_work_card=view-paper" target="_blank">draft, academia.edu</a>)</p><p>Quote of Luntz from the Strawson essay:</p><p></p><p></p><blockquote> I've got a certain rule that I always teach my staff: <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>It's not what you say; it's what people hear that matters</b></span>. I may respond to you effectively, but if you edit it in such a way that they only hear the negativity of what I do, then that's all they're going to know. And so they're going to conclude that my profession isn't an honorable profession. And that's why how I say it has as much of an impact on what people think of me as what I say.</blockquote><p></p><blockquote>[Regarding consistency,] there's a simple rule: <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">You say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and then again and again and again and again, and about the time that you're absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time</span>. And it is so hard, but you've just got to keep repeating, because we hear so many different things -- the noises from outside, the sounds, all the things that are coming into our head, the 200 cable channels and the satellite versus cable, and what we hear from our friends. We as Americans and as humans have very selective hearing and very selective memory. We only hear what we want to hear and disregard the rest.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-17856267030848075612023-11-03T13:59:00.001-07:002023-11-03T13:59:14.370-07:00The Israeli psyche resembles an archaeological site of layers of unresolved traumas, ordinary life interrupted by history<p>--- Yossi Klein Halevi, in For Israel, a "<a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/for-israel-a-war-unlike-any-other-b8160908" target="_blank">War Unlike Any Other</a>," WSJ Saturday Essay, Nov 3, 2023</p><p>First line in the piece: </p><p></p><blockquote>The Israeli psyche resembles an archaeological site of layers of unresolved traumas, ordinary life interrupted by history. Still, none of the previous wars and terror assaults and missile barrages that I’ve lived through in my four decades as an Israeli has quite prepared me for this moment of rage, dread, uncertainty, resolve.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-87590521557446978072023-10-05T09:26:00.004-07:002023-10-05T09:26:32.094-07:00Some highly successful people are nearly delusional in their beliefs that they can achieve lofty goals where others can’t<p>--- Jon Levy, behavioral scientist, quoted by Callum Borchers in <a href="https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/careers/why-people-take-no-win-jobs-like-kevin-mccarthys-3730ee3f" target="_blank">Why People Take No-Win Jobs Like Kevin McCarthy’s</a>, WSJ, 4 Oct 2023</p><p>Excerpt</p><p></p><blockquote><span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>Some highly successful people are nearly delusional in their beliefs that they can achieve lofty goals where others can’t</b></span>, says Jon Levy, a behavioral scientist who consults with organizations on building culture. It’s a mindset that can propel them beyond most of the rest of the population. You could call it the Elon Musk effect. If they considered their chances in rational terms, Levy says, they would probably give up.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-65096534543329346842023-09-29T12:54:00.000-07:002023-09-29T12:54:45.356-07:00actions and deeds are accompanied by reflections upon them, in the form of histories, myths, and song<p>--- John von Heyking, in <a href="https://themontrealreview.com/2009/Churchill-on-Friendship-as-Statecraft.php" target="_blank">Churchill on Friendship as Statecraft</a>, The Montréal Review, May 2021.</p><p>In context</p><p></p><blockquote>As statesman, Churchill understood the role of friendship for his craft. But his statecraft was more than actions and deeds. Recall he won the Nobel Prize not for peace but for literature. At Harrow he won a prize for reciting Macaulay’s “Lays of Ancient Rome” from memory (to show that his poor performance in Greek and Latin meant he was not, in his words, a complete “dunce”) and in My Early Life he recommends a Greek-style paideia of “poetry, songs, dancing, drill and gymnastics” for the young. His speeches, correspondence, and writings attest to his view that<b style="background-color: #fff2cc;"> actions and deeds are accompanied by reflections upon them, in the form of histories, myths, and song</b>. After the war is won, the peace must be won with songs and stories that win over hearts and minds. John F. Kennedy said “he mobilized the English language and sent it into battle. The incandescent quality of his words illuminated the courage of his countrymen.” As I previously mentioned, Churchill chose the hymns and even arranged the deck chairs for the worship service he held with Roosevelt on board the H.M.S. Prince of Wales at Placentia Bay. He composed his speeches in the same format as Biblical psalms. One reviewer of a collection of his speeches proclaimed, “He not only makes laws for his people but writes their songs as well, in the sense that his speeches are battle cries, dirges for the fallen and hymns of victory.” Indeed, his Cabinet colleagues complained of his voluminous correspondence and memos that he was fighting the war simply to write the history.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-28780592647253450202023-09-17T17:06:00.001-07:002023-10-05T11:14:04.305-07:00history is made up of truths that eventually become lies, while mythology is made up of lies that eventually become truths<p> --- Jean Cocteau, 1962, <a href="https://youtu.be/z-x-wNiN4Hk" target="_blank">film </a>"Jean Cocteau s'addresse a l'an 2000", at <a href="https://youtu.be/z-x-wNiN4Hk?t=434" target="_blank">time code 7:14</a>, h/t Matt Nesselrodt</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;">“I have always preferred mythology to history because <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>history is made up of truths that eventually become lies, while mythology is made up of lies that eventually become truths</b></span>.”</p></blockquote><div><br /></div><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-38470474078625465562023-09-16T17:01:00.002-07:002023-09-16T17:01:12.773-07:00modern western man ... no longer believes that he can know what is good and bad<p> --- Leo Strauss, "The Three Waves of Modernity," <i>Political Philosophy: Six Essays</i>, ed. Hilail Gildin, Pegasus-Bobbs-Merrill, 1975, p. 81-82</p><p>Excerpt from <a href="http://contemporarythinkers.org">https://contemporarythinkers.org/leo-strauss/essay/the-three-waves-of-modernity/</a>:</p><p>The crisis of modernity reveals itself in the fact, or consists in the fact, that <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">modern western man no longer knows what he wants–that he no longer believes that he can know what is good and bad</span>, what is right and wrong. Until a few generations ago, it was generally taken for granted that man can know what is right and wrong, what is the just or the good or the best order of society–in a word that political philosophy is possible and necessary. In our time this faith has lost its power. According to the pre-dominant view, political philosophy is impossible: it was a dream, perhaps a noble dream, but at any rate a dream. While there is broad agreement on this point, opinions differ as to why political philosophy was based on a fundamental error. According to a very widespread view, all knowledge which deserves the name is scientific knowledge; but scientific knowledge cannot validate value judgments; it is limited to factual judgments; yet political philosophy presupposes that value judgments can be rationally validated. According to a less widespread but more sophisticated view, the predominant separation of facts from values is not tenable.: the categories of theoretical understanding imply, somehow, principles of evaluation; but those principles of evaluation together with the categories of understanding are historically variable; they change from epoch to epoch; hence it is impossible to answer the question of right and wrong or of the best social order in a universally valid manner, in a manner valid for all historical epochs, as political philosophy requires.</p><p><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=cpx2j0TumyIC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA81#v=onepage&q=he%20no%20longer%20believes%20that%20he%20can%20know%20what%20is%20good%20and%20bad&f=false" target="_blank">Google Books</a></p><p><br /></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-66123461269017163012023-09-16T11:55:00.000-07:002023-09-16T11:55:22.356-07:00If you’re less than five minutes early, you’re late<p> --- Saying in the military, quoted by Bear Grylls in <a href="https://wsj-article-webview-generator-prod.sc.onservo.com/webview/WP-WSJ-0001168833" target="_blank">‘The Best Advice a Boss Ever Gave Me’</a>, WSJ Sep 2023</p><p>From the article:</p><p></p><blockquote><p>“When I first joined the military, a sergeant major told me: ‘<span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>If you’re less than five minutes early, you’re late</b></span>.’ I’ve never forgotten those words and have always tried to make it a mantra when filming or working. I really notice it too in others, on expeditions for example. It speaks to diligence and dedication.”</p><p>Bear Grylls is the host of ‘Running Wild with Bear Grylls: The Challenge,’ on National Geographic</p></blockquote><p></p><p>The saying reminds me of a "twenty before twenty" an ex-military person told me about: The colonel says that everyone should muster at 0800, the captain makes it 0740, the sergeant major makes it 0720, and the corporal makes it 0700.</p><p>There's a <a href="https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/382299/origin-of-the-phrase-5-minutes-early-is-on-time-on-time-is-late-late-is-unac" target="_blank">StackExchange thread</a> on the origin. Variations include "Early is on time; on time is late" and "Five minutes early is on time."</p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-86901661273001600152023-09-06T13:19:00.000-07:002023-09-06T13:19:12.738-07:00You can’t put [the universe] in a box on a table and run controlled experiments on it<p>--- physicists Adam Frank and Marcelo Gleiser in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/02/opinion/cosmology-crisis-webb-telescope.html" target="_blank">The Story of Our Universe May Be Starting to Unravel</a>, NY Times guest essay, 2 Sep 2023, via <a href="https://mailchi.mp/spacenews/delta-4-heavy-launch-for-the-nro-scrubbed-intelsat-signs-up-again-with-spacelogistics-ssa-startups-raise-funding-181544" target="_blank">SN First Up, 6 Sep 2023</a></p><p></p><blockquote>Cosmology is not like other sciences. It’s not like studying mice in a maze or watching chemicals boil in a beaker in a lab. The universe is everything there is; there’s only one and we can’t look at it from the outside. <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">You can’t put it in a box on a table and run controlled experiments on it.</span> Because it is all-encompassing, cosmology forces scientists to tackle questions about the very environment in which science operates: the nature of time, the nature of space, the nature of lawlike regularity, the role of the observers doing the observations.</blockquote><p>The story behind the essay title: "But one of the Webb’s first major findings was exciting in an uncomfortable sense: It discovered the existence of fully formed galaxies far earlier than should have been possible according to the so-called standard model of cosmology." </p><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-64126598555751150152023-09-01T15:35:00.000-07:002023-09-01T15:35:32.218-07:00There are no solutions, only trade-offs<p> --- Economist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell" target="_blank">Thomas Sowell</a>, quoted passim e.g. by Anna Reynolds at <a href="https://inspirevirtue.com/thomas-sowell-speaks-the-truth-there-are-no-solutions-only-trade-offs/">InspireVirtue.com</a> </p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-13652655269746636872023-09-01T14:05:00.005-07:002023-09-01T14:05:55.315-07:00we absolutely are going to turn our systems into agents with goals<p> --- Zvi Mowshowitz on the <a href="https://www.econtalk.org/zvi-mowshowitz-on-ai-and-the-dial-of-progress/" target="_blank">EconTalk podcast, Aug 7, 2023</a></p><p>In context, from the transcript</p><p></p><blockquote><p>What we do know is that humans love achieving goals, and that when you give an AI system goals, it helps you achieve your goals. Right? At least on the margin, at least to starting out, people think this. And so, we see Baby GPT and Auto GPT and all these other systems that turns out for 100 lines of code. You can create the scaffolding around GPT-4 that makes an attempt to act like it has goals. Right? To take actions as if it had goals and to act as a goal-motivated system.</p><p>And, it's not great because the underlying technologies aren't there, and we haven't gone through the iterations of building the right scaffolding, and we don't know a lot of the tricks, and it's still very, very early days.</p><p>But, <span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><b>we absolutely are going to turn our systems into agents with goals</b></span> that are trying to achieve goals, that then create sub-goals, that then plan but then ask themselves, 'What do we need to do in order to accomplish this thing?' And, that will include like, 'Oh, I don't have this information. I need to go get this information.' 'I don't have this capability. I don't have access to this tool. I need to get this tool.' And, it's a very small leap from there to, 'I'm going to need more money.' Right? Or something like that. And from there, the sky's the limit. So, we can rule out, through experimentation in a way that we couldn't two years ago--right?--this particular theory of Marc's that the systems in the future won't have goals in a meaningful sense unless we take action to stop it.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>Host Russ Roberts then went on to talk about aspiration which to me is a subset of having goals - it's the felt experience of having goals. Not surprisingly, he then connected goals to sentience and consciousness.</p><p></p><blockquote>And, I think part of the reason that the skeptics--the optimists--are more optimistic. And, part of the reason I think we are in some sense just telling different narratives and some are more convincing than others, and it's mainly stories, is that we don't have any vivid examples today of my vacuum cleaner wanting to be a driverless car--an example I've used before. It doesn't aspire. Now, we might see some aspiration or at least perceived aspiration in ChatGPT at some point, but I think part of the problem getting people convinced about its dangers is that that leap--<span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">a sentience leap, the consciousness leap, which is where goals come in</span>--doesn't seem credible. At least today. Maybe it will be, and I think that's where you and others who are worried about AI need to help me and others who are less worried to see.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13755810.post-4239966904748842042023-09-01T09:24:00.005-07:002023-09-01T09:25:00.043-07:00Bennu is like an old friend at this point, even though it's a trickster<p> --- Dante Lauretta, principal investigator for NASA's OSIRIS-REx mission, discussing at a briefing what it has been like studying the asteroid Bennu, samples of which OSIRIS-REx is returning to Earth later this month, quoted in <a href="https://mailchi.mp/spacenews/delta-4-heavy-launch-for-the-nro-scrubbed-intelsat-signs-up-again-with-spacelogistics-ssa-startups-raise-funding-181520" target="_blank">SN FirstUp, Friday, September 1, 2023</a></p><p>Full quote</p><p></p><blockquote><span style="background-color: #fff2cc;">Bennu is like an old friend at this point, even though it's a trickster</span>. It likes to play jokes on us. It likes to challenge us. We thrive on that. I really feel a connection to this asteroid. It's holding these clues, and I think it wants us to study it, it wants us to unravel this mystery.</blockquote><p></p>JP (Pierre) de Vrieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02311009024575927588noreply@blogger.com