He’s good in his description of emergent properties of complex systems and I’m in alignment with embodied cognition although I 8think* there was a minor point or two I had with his stuff on the “teenage brain” which _is_ better than most teenage brain treatments but was a little sloppy in some simplifications. But overall, nothing jumps out that immediately would cause me to reject him outright. Safe to recommend.

He’s good in his description of emergent properties of complex systems and I’m in alignment with embodied cognition although I 8think* there was a minor point or two I had with his stuff on the “teenage brain” which _is_ better than most teenage brain treatments but was a little sloppy in some simplifications. But overall, nothing jumps out that immediately would cause me to reject him outright. Safe to recommend.

Iterative process, yup. Oh, where is that model? – ah yes. Double loop learning. A lot of complexity is hidden here but it’s a good quick reminder now and again to check and adjust continually.

===

I get a sense he’s embuing complex systems with a bit of “quantum woo” to sell books on raising kids and do a bit of slight of hand… but a guy’s got to make a living and if a reader understands their continual participatory role in the relationship and sees self and other as agents participating in complex systems through which novel properties can emerge – AND understand what that means [even if it’s “mindfulness” as a simplification], then he’s doing good work and I have no qualms.

===

I know it’s more than that, but it’s a visual input system model so I had to say it

—-

The key for me is being very careful not to settle upon a model. I’ve accepted certain background models “as likely” such as embodied cognition over computational model, although I’ll use computational model when it’s effective as one need not negate the other.

Same here. I try to never stop learning. Actually, one can’t help BUT continually learn, even if it’s reinforcing, but I like to keep challenging my preconceptions, even if “that great new thing I learned” becomes the “new preconception”.

In fact, especially then, for it’s easy to become an advocate for a system that answers many questions BETTER than others you know before, without noticing what traits it’s missing.

===

THIS ONE, for example, had me SO STUNNED at how well everything went together, that I had to put it aside for a while. I found myself wanting to advocate for it.

But I saw nothing contrary to it. With every idea, there’s SOME criticism and if I can’t find it, I usually wait a bit.

http://www.danko-nikolic.com/practopoiesis/

same. it’s as if the gut system is nearly independent in so many ways. *is* it another brain?

===

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− 3 = two

Leave a Reply