Archive for February 5th, 2022

What are the limits?

What are the limitations of conversation?

:- Doug.

Published in: Conversations | on February 5th, 2022 | No Comments »

How is best to think?

How is best to think about conversation?

:- Doug.

Published in: Conversations | on February 5th, 2022 | No Comments »

Problem of conversation?

What is the problem of conversation?

:- Doug.

Published in: Conversations | on February 5th, 2022 | No Comments »

Parallels or contrasts: mind and conversation

Here are some things that seem to invite some parallels or contrasts between mind and conversation:

# Mind is interacting parts. Conversation is interacting parts.

# The interacting is triggered by difference. In both cases. But in conversation, it might be triggered by a desire to show similarity, attraction, affinity.

# Mental process requires energy from a collateral source. Conversation gathers energy from the “others” in the conversation.

# Mental process requires circular or more complex chains of causation. Seems clear conversation does too.

# In mental process, the effects of difference are treated as transforms of the preceding events. Conversation sometimes restates, sometimes transforms, sometimes contradicts. The liveliness of conversation comes just here.

# In mental process there is a hierarchy of logical types immanent in the phenomena. I suspect there is a hierarchy of logical types in conversation, e.g. chit-chat to deeper to meta-conversation, to meta-meta-conversation.

# Mental process is always a sequence of interacting parts. Conversation by definition is too.

# Difference is in the nature of relationship and therefore is not in time or space. The same can be said of the liveliness of conversation, but conversation is aided by closeness in space and possibly time.

# Slight difference is difficult for mind to perceive; slight difference in conversation might similarly be boring.

# In biologic systems, the end of the sequence (round?) sets up future repetition. Seems true of conversation.

# In biologic systems, two sets of energy are at play: that which opens the spigot, and that which flows through the system. Starting words, and the flow that happens.

# Runaway is possible in human systems, and it takes little energy by one to destroy others or the integration of a society. This bears study and consideration in conversation, since it is most certainly observed, and study of it might yield some valuable insights for improving conversation: what might be the self-corrective links?

# Time added to the relationships gives rise to emergent properties—all carry out something no one of them brought in—and this is a clue to the self-corrective we seek.

# This self-corrective may be in the nature of a new logical type.

# The switch does not exist, except in the moment of being thrown. This is a relatively less visible different logical type.

# The effect is not the cause.

# There is no simple relationship between the magnitude of the trigger and the resulting response. This could be valuable, if it could be tracked and forecast, but it seems random and thus dangerous.

# We probably can only guess at wholes. This is a starting point to study and might lead to more learning, which may be the same as more guesses.

:- Doug.

Published in: Conversations | on February 5th, 2022 | No Comments »

Overlaps and triggers

In conversation, having available to us another’s point of view, varying from ours, gives us a way to understand. But there is more there, since the other might actually bring in new pieces of information; or together our relating these things might create a new idea: take us to a different logical dimension. So the added person, and especially the overlaps and triggers, adds or takes information to a power.

:- Doug.

Published in: Conversations | on February 5th, 2022 | No Comments »
Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com