models: 2021

Friday, December 10, 2021

Licklider and Robert Taylor

[models]

[modeling]

[most important models are those that reside in human's minds]

[most important models are those that reside in woman's minds]

In Memoriam: J. C. R. Licklider (1915-1990)

August 7, 1990

The Computer as a Communication Device

J. C. R. Licklider and Robert W. Taylor

pp.22-23

Communication: a comparison of models

To understand how and why the computer can have such an effect on communication, we must examine the idea of modeling-in a computer with the aid of a computer. For modeling, we believe, is basic and central to communication. Any communication between people about the same thing is a common revelatory experience about informational models of that thing. Each model is a conceptual structure of abstractions formulated initially in the mind of one of the persons who would communicate, and if the concepts in the mind of one would-be communicator are very different from those in the mind of another, there is no common model and no communication.

By far the most numerous, most sophisticated, and most important models are those that reside in men's minds. In richness, plasticity, facility, and economy, the mental model has no peer, but in other respects, it has shortcomings. It will not stand still for careful study. It cannot be made to repeat a run. No one knows just how it works. It serves its owner's hopes more faithfully than it serves reason. It has access only to the information stored in one man's head. It can be observed and manipulated only by one person.

Society rightly distrusts the modeling done by a single mind. Society demands consensus, agreement, at least majority. Fundamentally, this amounts to the requirement that individuals models be compared and brought into some degree of accord. The requirement is for communication, which we now define concisely as “cooperative modeling” ── cooperation in the construction, maintenance, and the use of a model.

How can we be sure that we are modeling cooperatively, that we are communicating, unless we can compare models?

When people communicate face to face, they externalize their models so they can be sure they are talking about the same thing. Even such a simple externalized model as a flow diagram or an outline-because it can be seen by all the communicators ── serves as a focus for discussion. It changes the nature of communication: When communicators have no such common framework, they merely make speeches at each other; but when they have a manipulable model before them, they utter a few words, point, sketch, nod, or object.

Acknowledgements

Evan Herbert edited the article and acted as intermediary during its writing between Licklider in Boston and Taylor in Washington.

Roland B. Wilson drew the cartoons to accompany the original article.

____________________________________

[mental models]

In Memoriam: J. C. R. Licklider (1915-1990)

August 7, 1990

The Computer as a Communication Device

J. C. R. Licklider and Robert W. Taylor

Take any problem worthy of the name, and you find only a few people who can contribute effectively to its solution. Those people must be brought into close intellectual partnership so that their ideas can come into contact with one another. But bring these people together physically in one place to form a team, and you have trouble, for the most creative people are often not the best team players, and there are not enough top positions in a single organization to keep them all happy. Let them go their separate ways, and each creates his own empire, large or small, and devotes more time to the role of emperor than to the role of problem solver. The principals still get together at meetings. They still visit one another. But the time scale of their communication stretches out, and the correlations among mental models degenerate between meetings so that it may take a year to do a week's communicating. There has to be some way of facilitating communication among people wit bout [sic] [without] bringing them together in one place.

Acknowledgements

Evan Herbert edited the article and acted as intermediary during its writing between Licklider in Boston and Taylor in Washington.

Roland B. Wilson drew the cartoons to accompany the original article.

Richard Feynman, Alan Lightman, Owen Gingerich

[framework]

“… you have to be in some framework that you allow something to be true. …”;──Richard Feynman, http://lesswrong.com/lw/99c/transcript_richard_feynman_on_why_questions/

“Things, that by virtue of their explanation, appear to ‘belong’ to something else (as a ‘necessary’ conceptual framework) can - in this way - successfully disappear from our view.”; until a new framework is put together and represented, the information are not even perceived to be facts. They are invisible.*3M8

Alan Lightman and Owen Gingerich, 1991 Science

article, “When Do Anomalies Begin?” wrote:

“certain scientific anomalies are recognized

only after they are given compelling explanations

within a new conceptual framework. Before

this recognition, the peculiar facts

are taken as givens or are ignored in the

old framework.”

In other words, the real anormalies ... are

at first not even perceived as anomalies.

They are invisible.

── Kevin Kelly, 1994,

from the book, Out of Control,

p.381, filename: ooc-mf.pdf

“Things, that by virtue of their chance position, appear to ‘belong’ to something else (as a ‘necessary’ component) can - in this way - successfully disappear from our view, even though they are lying completely exposed.”, p.xxx, “Laws of seeing” by Wolfgang Metzger, 1936, translated into English, by Spillmann, Lehar, Stromeyer, and Wertheimer, published by MIT Press (October, 2006).

____________________________________

*3M8

• Things - that naturally appear to ‘belong together’ with something else - can disappear from our view.

• Things, that by virtue of their chance position, naturally appear to ‘belong together’ with something else can - in this way - successfully disappear from our view.

“Things, that by virtue of their chance position, appear to ‘belong’ to something else (as a ‘necessary’ component) can - in this way - successfully disappear from our view.”

Original quote <verbatim>: “Things that by virtue of their chance position appear to ‘belong’ to something else as a ‘necessary’ component can in this way successfully disappear from our view, even though they are lying completely exposed.”, p.xxx, “Laws of seeing” by Wolfgang Metzger, 1936, translated into English, by Spillmann, Lehar, Stromeyer, and Wertheimer, published by MIT Press (October, 2006).

Metzger's challenge:

“It is precisely that which naturally ‘belongs together’ that get organized together. And what belongs together is that which ‘fits’ together, that is, that which together results in a well-organized, unitary structure. Things that by virtue of their chance position appear to ‘belong’ to something else as a ‘necessary’ component can in this way successfully disappear from our view, even though they are lying completely exposed. You can make a nice party game out of ‘openly hiding’ erasers, pencils and other things up to the size of a walking stick according to this law.”,

p.361, 2007 • volume 3 • no 1-2 • xxx-xxx, Advances in Cognitive Psychology, Book Review, “Laws of seeing” by Wolfgang Metzger, 1936, translated into English, by Spillmann, Lehar, Stromeyer, and Wertheimer, published by MIT Press (October, 2006)., Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Adam Reeves, Dept. of Psychology, Northeastern University, 360 Huntingdon Ave., Boston MA 02115, USA., http://www.ac-psych.org

____________________________________

Laws of Seeing

Wolfgang Metzger

Translated by Lothar Spillmann

http://www.lothar-spillmann.de/Lothar_Spillmann/Curriculum_Vitae_files/flyer.pdf

This classic work in vision science, written by a leading figure in Germany’s Gestalt movement in psychology and first published in 1936, addresses topics that remain of major interest to vision researchers today. Wolfgang Metzger’s main argument, drawn from Gestalt theory, is that the objects we perceive in visual experience are not the objects themselves but perceptual effigies of those objects constructed by our brain according to natural rules. Gestalt concepts are currently being increasingly integrated into mainstream neuroscience by researchers proposing network processing beyond the classical receptive field. Metzger’s discussion of such topics as ambiguous figures, hidden forms, camouflage, shadows and depth, and three-dimensional representations in paintings will interest anyone working in the field of vision and perception, including psychologists, biologists, neurophysiologists, and researchers in computational vision — and artists, designers, and philosophers. Each chapter is accompanied by compelling visual demonstrations of the phenomena described; the book includes 194 illustrations, drawn from visual science, art, and everyday experience, that invite readers to verify Metzger’s observations for themselves. Today’s researchers may find themselves pondering the intriguing question of what effect Metzger’s theories might have had on vision research if Laws of Seeing and its treasure trove of perceptual

Wolfgang Metzger (1899-1979) was a central figure in the Gestalt movement within psychology in Germany. He was Director of the Psychological Institute at the University of Münster.

____________________________________

:: This TEXT ::

“Things, that by virtue of their explanation, appear

to ‘belong’ to something else (as a ‘necessary’ conceptual

framework) can - in this way - successfully disappear

from our view.”; until a new framework is put together

and represented, the information are not even perceived to

be facts. They are invisible.*3M8

:: shared its existence and ancestry with ::

Metzger's challenge:

:: and ::

Alan Lightman and Owen Gingerich, 1991 Science

article, “When Do Anomalies Begin?” wrote:

“certain scientific anomalies are recognized

only after they are given compelling explanations

within a new conceptual framework. Before

this recognition, the peculiar facts

are taken as givens or are ignored in the

old framework.”

In other words, the real anormalies ... are

at first not even perceived as anomalies.

They are invisible.

── Kevin Kelly, 1994,

from the book, Out of Control,

p.381, filename: ooc-mf.pdf

If explanation can cause things to disappear, then a different explanation can cause things to re-appear. Using a well crafted explanation, we can create an effect in the mind to make the invisible, visible.

“...; sometimes, we must believe before we can see.”, p.9, Charles Perrow, Normal accidents : living with high-risk technologies, 1999.

p.9

In complex industrial, space, and military systems, the normal accident generally (not always) means that the interactions are not only unexpected, but are incomprehensible for some critical period of time. In part this is because in these human-machine systems the interactions literally cannot be seen. In part it is because, even if they are seen, they are not believed. As we shall find out and as Robert Jervis and Karl Weick have noted,3 seeing is not necessarily believing; sometimes, we must believe before we can see.

3. Robert Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton university press, 1976); and Karl Wieck, “Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems”, Administrative Science Quarterly 21:1 (March, 1976): 1-19.

____________________________________

hidden assumption(s)

“As was highlighted before, an application makes

assumptions (sometimes hidden assumptions)

about the environment and we should not expect

the application to work in environments for

which its assumptions are not valid.”;

── Eliyahu Goldratt, p.18,

Standing on the shoulders of Giants:

Production concepts versus production applications:

The Hitachi Tool Engineering Example,

By Dr. Eliyahu Goldratt;

filename: Standing-on-the-Shoulders-of-Giants.pdf

“As was highlighted before, [visual center] makes

assumptions (sometimes hidden assumptions)

about the environment and we should not expect

the [visual center] to work in environments for

which its assumptions are not valid.”;

We should not expect the visual center to work in a new environment or a new situation that has not been evolutionary experienced before. For example, as far as we know, humans are unable to visually see below the infrared spectrum and beyond the ultraviolet. The sensory organ that is used for the detection of infrared heat is our skin.

We should not expect the [sensory organs, the accompanying nervous system, and the neurological primate brain] to work in a new environment or a new situation that has not been evolutionary experienced before. For example, as far as we know, humans are animals, mammals, that have evolved over millions and millions of years in an environment, a life supporting system, on Earth. Sailors and ship builders intuitively know this. Submariners and underwater ships builders know this even more. This is also the reason why space simulation and training is done underwater. Most surface of Earth is covered in water, not in land. However, humans live and is dependent on land, its geographical ecosystem, the water, and the sea.

____________________________________

Michael Lewis, The undoing project, 2017 [ ]

p.153

Avishai Margalit

“I'm waiting in this corridor,” said Margalit. “And Amos comes to me, agitated, really. He started by dragging me into a room. He said, You won't believe what happened to me. He tells me that he had given this talk and Danny had said, Brilliant talk, but I don't believe a word of it. Something was really bothering him, and so I pressed him. He said, ‘It cannot be that judgement does not connect with perception. Thinking is not a separate act.’”

p.153

He said, ‘It cannot be that judgement does not connect with perception. Thinking is not a separate act.’

p.343

People didn't choose between things, they chose between descriptions of things.

p.343

“choice architecture”

The decisions people made were driven by the way they were presented. People didn't simply know what they wanted; they took cues from their environment. They constructed their preferences. And they followed paths of least resistance, even when they paid a heavy price for it.

(Michael Lewis, The undoing project, 2017, p.153, p.343 )

____________________________________

That selection process is perception. “I am a very big believer”, Hofstadter told me, “that the core processes of cognition are very, very tightly related to perception.”

── Kevin Kelly, 1994,

from the book, Out of Control,

p.18, filename: ooc-mf.pdf

Kevin Kelly, out of control, 1994 [ ]

p.18

“Memory”, says cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter, “is highly reconstructive. Retrieval from memory involves selecting out of a vast field of things what's important and what is not important, emphasizing the important stuff, downplaying the unimportant.” That selection process is perception. “I am a very big believer”, Hofstadter told me, “that the core processes of cognition are very, very tightly related to perception.”

(Kevin Kelly, out of control, 1994, filename: ooc-mf.pdf )

____________________________________

Daniel Gilbert, Stumbling on happiness, 2006 [ ]

p.85

But in 1781 a reclusive German professor named Immanuel Kant broke loose, knocked over the screen in the corner of the room, and exposed the brain as a humbug of the highest order. Kant's new theory of idealism claimed that our perceptions are not the result of a physiological process by which our eyes somehow transmit an image of the world into our brains, but rather, they are the result of a psychological process that combines what our eyes see with what we already think, feel, know, want, and believe, and then used this combination of sensory information and preexisting knowledge to construct our perception of reality.

p.85

“The understanding can intuit nothing, the senses can think nothing”, Kant wrote. “Only through their union can knowledge arise.”16

p.85

Kant argued that a person's perception of a floating head is constructed from the person's knowledge of a floating head, memory of floating heads, belief in floating heads, need for floating heads, and sometimes──but not always──from the actual presence of a floating head itself. Perceptions are portraits, not photographs, and their form reveals the artist's hand every bit as much as it reflects the things portrayed.

(Stumbling on happiness / by Daniel Gilbert.--1st ed., 1. happiness., BF575.H27G55 2016, 158--dc22, 2016, )

____________________________________

Ha-Joon Chang, Economics : the user's guide, 2014

first published 2014

this paperback edition published 2015

p.238

; this is known as the reference group. We actually don't really care that much how well people who do not belong to our own reference groups are doing.*

p.153

Sometimes in the 1930s,

the office of the Gosplan, the central planning authority of the USSR

Interview for the post of the chief statistician

The first candidate is asked by the interview board, ‘What is 2 + 2, comrade?’

He answers: ‘5’.

‘Comrade, we very much appreciate your revolutionary enthusiasm, but this job needs someone who can count.’ The first candidate is politely dismissed.

The second candidate was asked, ‘Comrade, What is 2 + 2?’

He answer: ‘3’.

‘Arrest that man! We cannot tolerate this kind of counter-revolutionary propaganda, under-reporting our achievements!’ The second candidate is dragged out of the room by the guards.

The third candidate was asked the same question, ‘Comrade, What is 2 + 2?’

He answer: ‘Of course, it is 4’.

A member of the board gives him a lecture on the limitation of bourgeois science, fixated on formal logic. The third candidate is politely dismissed.

The fourth candidate was asked the same question, ‘Comrade, What is 2 + 2?’

He answer: ‘How many do you want it to be?’

The fourth candidate is hired.

Ha-Joon Chang, Economics : the user's guide, 2014

____________________________________

Sebastian Mallaby., More money than god : hedge funds and the making of a new elite, 2010.

• modeling of abnormal distributions was a problem largely unsolved in mathematics., pp.104-105

• Even in the early 1960s, a maverick mathematician named Benoit Mandelbrot argued that the tails of the distribution might be fatter than the normal bell curve assumed; and Eugene Fama, the father of efficient-market theory, who got to know Mandelbrot at the time, conducted tests on stock-price changes that confirmed Mandelbrot's assertion., pp.104-105

• The trouble with [Benoit] Mandelbrot's insight was that it was too awkward to live with; it rendered the statistical tools of financial economics useless, since the modeling of abnormal distributions was a problem largely unsolved in mathematics., pp.104-105

• the ... hypothesis did not apply to moments of crisis., p.106

pp.104-105

The efficient-market hypothesis had always been based on a precarious assumption: the price changes conformed to a “normal” probability distribution ── the one represented by the familiar bell curve, in which numbers at and near the median crop up frequently while numbers in the tails distribution are rare to the point of vanishing. Even in the early 1960s, a maverick mathematician named Benoit Mandelbrot argued that the tails of the distribution might be fatter than the normal bell curve assumed; and Eugene Fama, the father of efficient-market theory, who got to know Mandelbrot at the time, conducted tests on stock-price changes that confirmed Mandelbrot's assertion. If price changes had been normally distributed, jumps greater than five standard deviations should have shown up in daily price data about once every 7,000 years. Instead, they cropped up about once every three to four years.

Having made this discovery, Fama and his colleagues buried it. The trouble with Mandelbrot's insight was that it was too awkward to live with; it rendered the statistical tools of financial economics useless, since the modeling of abnormal distributions was a problem largely unsolved in mathematics.

p.105

Paul Cootner, complained that “Mandelbrot, like Prime Minister Churchill before him, promises us not utopia but blood, sweat, toil and tears. If he is right, almost all of our statistical tools are obsolete ── least squares, spectral analysis, workable maximum-likelihood solutions, all our established sample theory, closed distribution functions. Almost without exception, past econometric work is meaningless.”66

p.105

To prevent itself from toppling into this intellectual abyss, the economics profession kept its eyes trained the other way, especially since the mathematics of normal distributions was generating stunning breakthroughs.

p.105

In 1973 a trio of economists produced a revolutionary method for valuing options, and a thrilling new financial industry was born. Mandelbrot's objections were brushed off.

p.105

The crash of 1987 forced the economics profession to reexamine that assertion.

p.105

To put that probability into perspective, it meant that an event such as the crash would not be anticipated to occur even if the stock market were to remain open for twenty billion years, the upper end of the expected duration of the universe,

p.106

As well as challenging the statistical foundation of financial economists' thinking, Black Monday forced a reconsideration of their institutional assumptions.

p.106

In the chaos of the market meltdown, brokers' phone lines were jammed with calls from panicking sellers; it was hard to get through and place an order.

p.106

And, most important, the sheer weight of selling made it too risky to go against the trend. When the whole world is selling, it doesn't matter whether sophisticated hedge funds believe that prices have fallen too far. Buying is crazy.

At a minimum, it seemed, the efficient-market hypothesis did not apply to moments of crisis.

pp.106-107

But the crash raised a further question too: If markets were efficient, why had the equity bubble inflated in the first place? Again, the answer seemed to lie partly in the institutional obstacles faced by speculators. In the summer of 1987, investors could see plainly that stocks were selling for higher multiples of corporate earnings than they had historically; but if the market was determined to value them that way, it would cost money to buck it.

(More money than god : hedge funds and the making of a new elite / Sebastian Mallaby., 1. hedge funds., 2. investment advisors., HG4530.M249 2010, 332.64'524──dc22, 2010, )

____________________________________

Gerald M. & Daniela Weinberg

[images]

[models]

[model]

Gerald M. & Daniela Weinberg, General principles of systems design, 1988 [ ]

pp.265-266

The “wisdom of the body” is such that the body is able, unlike some people, to “admit” that it probably had a mistaken image of the situation. After it has exhausted its repertoire of mechanisms and matters still seem to be proceeding from bad to worse, the body may simply “let go.” In Seyle's words:

. . . when disease has already become generalized anyway, it is in the best interest of the body not to put up defensive inflammatory barricades. (1956: 120)

In other words, when all else fails, stop fighting and see what happens, lest you be destroyed by your own regulatory mechanisms.

For an individual, or a society, letting go is most likely to represent letting go of a worn-out model. The nervous breakdown, the revolutionary general strike, divorce, dropping out of school, these examples of letting go stir a ripple of fear within our breasts. We are like a man hanging by his very fingernails from the edge of a cliff, a cliff whose height he cannot see, but the image of which curdles his blood. He tortures himself until his fingers are torn to shreds, but finally he can take no more. Physically, he still has some strength, but he no longer has the will to stand the pain, so he lets go. And what happens? He finds that the ground is 3 inches below his feet!

The source of our fear is the general need to protect our images--our models of the world by which we regulate our lives. Because extraction of reliable models from the multivariable environment is such a long and expensive process, it normally pays a system to be conservative about preserving its model--even in the face of absolutely contradictory evidence.

(Weinberg, Gerald M.; General principles of systems design, Originally published as: On the design of stable system. 1979, 1. system analysis, QA402.W43 1988, copyright © 1988 by Gerald M. Weinberg and Daniela Weinberg, portions of this book appear in Becoming a technical leader, The secret of consulting, and Rethinking systems analysis & design, pp.265-266)

____________________________________

theory (theories)

[mental models]

[theories]

p.38

PEOPLE AS EXPLANATORY CREATURES

Mental models, our conceptual models of the way objects work, events take place, or people behave, result from our tendency of form explanations of things. These models are essential in helping us understand our experiences, predict the outcomes of our actions, and handle unexpected occurrences. We base our models on whatever knowledge we have, real or imaginary, naïve or sophisticated.

p.39

The real point of the example is not that some people have erroneous theories; it is that everyone forms theories (mental models) to explain what they have observed. In the case of the thermostat, the design gives absolutely no hint as to the correct answer. In the absence of external information, people are free to let their imaginations run free as long as the mental models they develop account for the facts as they perceive them.

____________________________________

a theory is 'a way of seeing'

____________________________________

Einstein once commented that "It is the theory which decides what we can observe".

source:

http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/EP-primer.html

Evolutionary Psychology: A Primer

by Leda Cosmides & John Tooby

The goal of research in evolutionary psychology is to discover and understand the design of the human mind. Evolutionary psychology is an approach to psychology, in which knowledge and principles from evolutionary biology are put to use in research on the structure of the human mind. It is not an area of study, like vision, reasoning, or social behavior. It is a way of thinking about psychology that can be applied to any topic within it.

In this view, the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. This way of thinking about the brain, mind, and behavior is changing how scientists approach old topics, and opening up new ones.

An evolutionary approach provides powerful lenses that correct for instinct blindness. It allows one to recognize what natural competences exist, it indicates that the mind is a heterogeneous collection of these competences and, most importantly, it provides positive theories of their designs.

Einstein once commented that "It is the theory which decides what we can observe".

An evolutionary focus is valuable for psychologists, who are studying a biological system of fantastic complexity, because it can make the intricate outlines of the mind's design stand out in sharp relief.

____________________________________

pp.31-32

Models and Truth

Have you ever wondered why Einstein's Theory of Relativity is called a "theory" rather than fact? Are scientists in doubt about it? Are they waiting until they've proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt beore they remove the "theory" label and promote it to the ranks of accepted knowledge? Actually, no. As I write this, scientists are fairly happy at least with what Einstein called his "special" theory of relativity--a theory about the way things behave when they move around relative to each other--a theory which, incidentally, contradicts the theory of Sir Isaac Newton . . .

The reason these scientific ideas are called theories, not facts, is because in science, the only facts are the observed results of experiments. Anything that does a good job of explaining results and predicting the results of new experiments is called a theory or model. Observations are facts; explaination are theories.

. . . As far as we know, Einstein's theory is true, although it has yet to be fully integrated with quantum mechanics. . . .

____________________________________

Kevin Slavin: 'Market trading systems need to be rebuilt for humans'

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/01/mit-media-lab-kevin-slavin

22 July 13

we're so desperate to get ahead of the game and predict outcomes, that every time we solve a problem we create a bigger one.

the invention of the ship was also the invention of the shipwreck.

"It figures it out not because it's smart, but because it seems smart without underlying sensibilities."

He gave the example of a Department of Defense story that is rumoured to be true, in which an algorithm was developed to automatically detect for tanks in the field. They trained the cameras and took 100 photos, but when it came to testing it was total chaos. It was performing so well, so they went back and had a human look at them, but all photos with tanks on them were on a sunny day, and photos without tanks were from a cloudy day. It turns out what they'd trained it to do was tell the weather. This is what happens without a theory -- it's in the explanation."

"We need explanations because for better or worse they're the protocol for the human mind,";--Kevin Slavin: 'Market trading systems need to be rebuilt for humans', http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/01/mit-media-lab-kevin-slavin, 22 July 13.

____________________________________

theoria (thinking)

theoretical, the end goal being truth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praxis_(process)

In Ancient Greek the word praxis (πρᾶξις) referred to activity engaged in by free people. The philosopher Aristotle held that there were three basic activities of humans: theoria (thinking), poiesis (making), and praxis (doing). Corresponding to these activities were three types of knowledge: theoretical, the end goal being truth; poietical, the end goal being production; and practical, the end goal being action.[2] Aristotle further divided the knowledge derived from praxis into ethics, economics, and politics. He also distinguished between eupraxia (εὐπραξία, "good praxis")[3] and dyspraxia (δυσπραξία, "bad praxis, misfortune").[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_of_the_Greek_Classics

Western European reception of Greek ideas via Arabian tradition

Arabic logicians had inherited Greek ideas after they had invaded and conquered Egypt and the Levant. Their translations and commentaries on these ideas worked their way through the Arab West into Spain and Sicily, which became important centers for this transmission of ideas. [1]

Western Arabic translations of Greek works (found in Iberia and Sicily) originates in the Greek sources preserved by the Byzantines. These transmissions to the Arab West took place in two main stages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovery_of_Aristotle

The "Recovery of Aristotle" (or Rediscovery) refers to the copying or re-translating of most of Aristotle's books (of ancient Greece), from Greek or Arabic text into Latin, during the Middle Ages, of the Latin West.[1][2] The Recovery of Aristotle spanned about 100 years, from the middle 12th century into the 13th century, and copied or translated over 42 books (see: Corpus Aristotelicum), including Arabic texts from Arabic authors, where the previous Latin versions had only two books in general circulation: Categories and On Interpretation (De Interpretatione).[1] Translations had been due to several factors, including limited techniques for copying books, lack of access to the Greek texts, and few people who could read ancient Greek, while the Arabic versions were more accessible. The recovery of Aristotle's texts is considered a major period in mediaeval philosophy, leading to Aristotelianism.[1][2][3]

____________________________________

[theory]

[a statement of causality]

[what causes what and why]

cc - Clayton Christensen

theory is a statement of causality

it's a statement of what causes what and why

3:25

and when you think about in those terms,

...

because every time you take an action

it's predicated upon a belief that, if you do this,

you'll get the result that you want.

And every time you put a plan into place,

it's predicated upon a set of theories, which tells you,

if you do these things, you'll be successful.

But most of the people aren't even aware of the theories

that they use

5:31

if somebody can come to us with a problem,

rather than giving them my opinion about how to solve the problem, instead what we're able to do is say

well if that's the problem, you know, then we have a theory on the shelf called

the theory of disruption

and I bet you that if we put that theory on like a set of lenses and examine this problem, we might be able to understand what's going on.

and so that's what I want to do is explain to you

a set of problems for which good theories might help you

23:44

there is a job I need to know, given the situation that I am in

the story about hiring a milkshake to do a job

23:56

because the situation that I am in has a huge impact on the nature of the job

1:19:09

what we intend to do and how we spend our time and our lives

source: youtube.com

Where does growth come from? | Clayton Christensen | talk at Google

published on Aug 8, 2016

____________________________________

James Gleick., The information : a history, a theory, a flood, 2011

pp.332-333

This is what science always seeks: a simple theory that accounts for a large set of facts and allows for prediction of events still to come.

(The information : a history, a theory, a flood / James Gleick., 1. information science--history., 2. information society., Z665.G547 2011, 020.9--dc22, 2011, )

____________________________________

"The Mess We're In" by Joe Armstrong

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXe3HUG2l4

Strange Loop

Published on Sep 19, 2014

24:16

causality

a cause must always precede its effect

information travels at or less than the speed of light

we do not know that something has happened until we get a message saying that the event has happenned

we do not know how things are now at a remote location, only how they were the last time we got a message from them

____________________________________

[explanations]

[protocol for the human mind]

“ We need explanations because for better or worse

they're the protocol for the human mind, ”;

── Kevin Slavin: 'Market trading systems

need to be rebuilt for humans', http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/01/mit-media-lab-kevin-slavin, 22 July 13.

Russell Ackoff (1919-2009) once said, and you can look for his talk on youtube.com: other necessary condition (the environment); the environment (full), in contrast with environment (free); all explanations now requires an environment; every law is constrained by the environment by which it applies; there is no such things as a universal law; they are all environmentally relative.;

____________________________________

Experience (empirical, ἐμπειρία, empeiría, senses):

Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).

source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence

____________________________________

• Today's physicists says nonsense: a moving object continues to move unless some force is exerted to stop it. [physics free of the environment (let's just ignore air friction, ground friction and the gravity in our model)]

• Yet anyone who has ever pushed a heavy box along a street or, for that matter, hiked for miles into the wilderness, knows that Aristotle was right: if you don't keep on pushing, the movement stops. (emperical; experience; natural environmental behavior) [environment (full): every law is constrained by the environment by which it applies; there is no such things as a universal law; they are all environmentally relative.]

Donald A. Norman, The psychology of everyday things, 1988 [ ]

p.36

Yet Aristotle's theories correspond much better to common-sense, everyday observations than do the highly refined and abstract theories we are taught in school.

p.36

ARISTOTOLE'S NAÏVE PHYSICS

For example, Aristotle thought that moving objects kept moving only if something kept pushing them. Today's physicists says nonsense: a moving object continues to move unless some force is exerted to stop it. This is Newton's 1st law of motion [“an object in motion” tends to stay in motion], and it contributed to the development of modern physics. Yet anyone who has ever pushed a heavy box along a street or, for that matter, hiked for miles into the wilderness, knows that Aristotle was right: if you don't keep on pushing, the movement stops. Of course, Newton and his successors assume the absence of friction and air [because they can neither measure nor quantify the phenomenon, they ignore the friction and air in their physics model, or a less misleading explaination is that the friction is implicitly universal, liken to gravity]. Aristotle lived in a world where there was always friction and air resistance. Once friction is involved, then objects in motion tend to stop unless you keep pushing. Aristotle's theory may be bad physics, but it describes reasonably well what we can see in the real world.

____________________________________

[knowledge]

[image]

[what I believe to be true; my subjective knowledge.]

• Knowledge has an implication of validity, of truth; the IMAGE is what I believe to be true ― my subjective knowledge of the world; It is this Image that governs my behavior. (Boulding 1956: 5―6) (p.238, Gerald M. Weinberg and Daniela Weinberg, General principles of systems design, 1988)

p.238

I know that when I get into my car there are some things I must do to start it; some things I must do to back out of the parking lot; some things I must do to drive home. I know that if I jump off a high place I will probably hurt myself. I know that there are some things that would probably not be good for me to eat or to drink. I know certain precautions that are advisable to take to maintain good health. I know that if I lean to far backward in my chair as I sit here at my desk, I will probably fall over. I live, in other words, in a world of reasonably stable relationships, a world of “ifs” and “thens,” of “if I do this, then that will happen . . .”

What I have been talking about is knowledge. Knowledge, perhaps, is not a good word for this. Perhaps one would rather say my IMAGE of the world. Knowledge has an implication of validity, of truth. What I am talking about is what I believe to be true; my subjective knowledge. It is this Image that largely governs my behavior. (Boulding 1956: 5―6)

</block citation end>

____________________________________

Weltanschauung [view of the world]

[how you view reality]

What they believe or their belief system is a simple way of saying, Weltanschauung [view of the world]. Weltanschauug or ‘experiencing the world from your point of view’ is more than just an idea [I mean, how else can you see the world, right?; it should be a given that people see the world from their own point of view; however, this is problem when you have your own point of view, the other person has his or her point of view, and the two point of views is causing problem, because the two point of views has to be resolved together into an agree upon course of action, or, nothing could move forward]. Weltanschauug is an intellectual filter, a belief system, a worldview interpreter, your very own personal theory of how the world operate, or not operating, a concept of how you view nature, a concept of how you view reality, and how to investigate the relationship between your Weltanschauung [worldview] and the nature of reality. (p.1 [un-numbered], Russell L. Ackoff, Ackoff's best, 1999)

____________________________________

[theories]

David A. Kolb, Experiential Learning, 1984 [ ]

... We are all psychologists, historians, and atomic physicists. It is just that some of our theories are more crude and incorrect than others. But to focus solely on the refinement and validity of these theories misses the point. The important point is that the people we teach have held these beliefs, whatever their quality, and that until now they have used them whenever the situation called for them, to be atomic physicists, historians, or whatever.

Thus, one's job as an educators is not only to implant new ideas but also to dispose of or modify old ones. In many cases, resistance to new ideas stems from their conflict with old beliefs ... . If the education process begins by bringing out the learner's beliefs and theories, examining and testing them, and then integrating the new, more refined ideas into the person's belief systems, the learning process will be facilitated. Piaget (see Elkind, 1970, Chapter 3) has identified two mechanisms by which new ideas are adopted by an individual — integration and substition. Ideas that evolve through integration tend to become highly stable parts of the person's conception of the world. On the other hand, when the content of a concept changes by means of substitution, there is always the possibility of a reversion to the earlier level of conceptualization and understanding, or to a dual theory of the world where espoused theories learned through substitution are incongruent with theories-in-use that are more integrated with the person's total conceptual and attitudinal view of the world. It is this latter outcome that stimulated Argyris and Schon's inquiry into the effectiveness of professional education:

—<begin citation, Argyris and Schon>

We thought the trouble people have in learning new theories may stem not so much from the inherent difficulty of the new theories as from the existing theories people have that already determine practices. We call their operational theories of action theories-in-use [what people do] to distinguish them from the espoused theories that are used to describe and justify behaviour [what people say 'they do', and give a plausible story to explain, why did we do that]. [Argyris and Schon, 1974, p. viiii]

——<end citation, Argyris and Schon>

(David A. Kolb, 1984, Experiential Learning : experience as the source of learning and development, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.)

(Chapter Two, The process of experiential learning, p.35)'

____________________________________

p.14

If you look, for instance, at Jim Fearon’s work on rationalist explanations of war, you see that the reason of why wars occur, is not about ethnic, economic or other differences, but it’s rather about three elements, of which you have to have any one to get a war:

(1) uncertainty;

(2) a dispute over something indivisible; or

(3) a commitment problem.

Now this is a very significant contribution, because you can now predict the probability if any one dispute will become violent. Furthermore, as a policy maker, you can then zoom in on these three and eliminate them. Now if theory is about engaging with empirics, about testing explanatory value, then this is not a bad track record. Morgenthau in the preface to the third edition of Politics amongst Nations indicates he was urged to respond to critics of the logics of his theory, but he writes: ‘I will not stoop’. But this is not stooping, this is how science progresses! If your theory doesn’t hold to empirical scrutiny, what is it worth? In my view, realist theory and balance of power theory is affected in its core by the empirical and logical challenges posed. They have been sufficiently refuted, they are false theories, and we should move on. But they don’t move on.

source: Theory talk #31

BRUCE BUENO DE MESQUITA ON GAME THEORY, PREDICTION AND FEAR OF LOGICS IN IR (International Relation)

filename: Theory Talk31_BuenodeMesquita.pdf

http://www.theory-talks.org/2009/06/theory-talk-31.html

(URL link was copy & past from pdf, unverified)

www.theory-talks.org

____________________________________

[models]

“All disciplines work in a social context and the intellectual ecology that they operate under motivates behaviors and opinions. We quickly identify the “rules” for our group and try to defend our group identity. While sometimes these rules are written, most are discerned by observing what happens when people break them or by how people actually behave. Violating a group's rules as expressed by stories, traditions, and practices can disturb the intellectual ecology and cause us to be anxious about what we are doing. <skip last sentence>.”, p.11, Thomas Ask, Engineering for industrial designers & inventors, 2016

Thomas Ask, Engineering for industrial designers & inventors, 2016 [ ]

p.11

All disciplines work in a social context and the intellectual ecology that they operate under motivates behaviors and opinions. We quickly identify the “rules” for our group and try to defend our group identity. While sometimes these rules are written, most are discerned by observing what happens when people break them or by how people actually behave. Violating a group's rules as expressed by stories, traditions, and practices can disturb the intellectual ecology and cause us to be anxious about what we are doing. <skip last sentence>

p.30

The interactions of people within a group are an important component of creative expression. Creativity can be nurtured or nullified in a group. While Picasso and Braque collaborated to lead the Cubist movement and Einstein worked with Grossman to develop the mathematical language of nonlinear geometry for expressing relativity theories, many creative people from Sappho to Shakespeare do not collaborate. But how many great creators have had their creative products discarded when their life ended? How many more individuals who, while working within a group, had a wonderful idea attacked or ridiculed so as not to ever be developed? We will never know.

p.31

Sociological models of individual self and its relations to groups indicate people benefit from group participation and identification. The group you identify with can have consequences beyond the functioning of that group--the group can in turn define your self-worth. Morever, this relationship between self and group can adversely affect your view of those outside your group. Identity theory suggests that when self-proclaimed creative people gather in groups, they will deeply nurture one another's creativity and at the same time excoriate other groups' creative efforts. We can see in reviewing historic collaborations of artists and scientists that they gained confidence based on numbers. Therefore, while individual creativity is difficult to appraise, a group culture can have a predictable effect upon the individual members' creative expression.

(Thomas Ask, Engineering for industrial designers & inventors, 2016, )

____________________________________

Mark Stefik and Barbara Stefik, Breakthrough, 2004 [ ]

p.61

Stuart Card

Having a method of collecting new kinds of data allowed Card to see something that had gone unnoticed before. Having a theory enabled him to understand what to look for in the data and also guided his thinking toward a solution.

p.65

These approaches are like colors on a palette in that they can be mixed to form variations and combinations.

1. Theory-driven invention. A tag line for this approach might be “Eureka!” or “According to my theory ...” This approach uses a theory, a model, or an analogy as a tool for thinking. These tools for thought provide advantages and shortcuts to insights leading to invention.

2. Data-drive invention. The tag line for this approach might be “That's strange!” An inventor notices an anomaly or something surprising in the data. Paying attention in this way creates an advantage, leading to insights and invention.

3. Method-driven invention. The tag line for this approach might be “Now I can see it!” Researchers have a new instrument that enables them to observe things not visible before.20 The new instrument give them advantages in observation, leading to insights and invention. ([ two examples given in the book is the telescope, and the microscope ])

4. Need-driven invention. The tag line for this approach is “Necessity is the mother of invention.” An inventor learns about an unresolved need or problem in the world and searches for a way to satisfy it or solve it. This approach fosters invention because the problem rests at the back of the mind as an unresolved challenge. It becomes a backdrop for interpreting experiences all day long. In effect, an inventor thinks about whatever ideas or observations show up as elements of possible solutions.

p.48

The data-driven approach notices patterns and anomalies in data.

p.49

Figure 3.1

Four ways of inspiring discovery and invention. In the theory-driven approach, a mental model or theory provides a way of thinking that leads to insight and invention. In the data-driven approach, an anomaly in data reveals a surprising possibility. In the method-driven approach, instrumentation enables previously unknown observation, discoveries, and invention. The need-driven approach identifies problems and seeks solutions.

p.50

Method-driven is about how information is gathered; data-driven is about how it is analyzed for pattern; theory-driven is about how it is understood and interpreted. In this way, these three methods correspond to three stages in gathering and processing information to create knowledge. The need-driven method relates to purpose──the sense that invention is not just about curiosity but also about making a difference in the world.

p.267

2. The four (4) approaches were suggested to us by Joshua Lederberg in a personal communication dated October 12, 2001. He carried out an analysis of his own research and that of close colleagues. All four (4) approaches were well represented, and most of the research was dominated by one approach. For need-driven invention, Lederberg cites his need to isolate auxotrophic mutants (bacteria requiring specific substances for growth and metabolism) as inspiring his invention of a penicillin method and also his invention of replica plating. For the data-driven approach, he notes that anomalous data led to the discovery of virus-mediated transduction (transfer of genetic material from one bacterial cell to another) and also the discovery of plasmids and lysogeny (the fusion of nucleic acid of a bacteriophage with that of a host bacterium). For the method-driven approach, he cites the design of instrumentation for exobiology (used in a Mars mission) and a use of replica plating to prove pre-adaptive occurrence of mutants. For theory-driven approach, he cites his own review of the natural history of bacteria, which persuaded him that sex (the exchange of genes) was a likely process. This led to his Nobel Prize. Lederberg notes that sex in bacteria also involved a need element and a method element. To understand the implications of the first intimation that genes are encoded in DNA (Avery et al. 1944) required better insight into whether bacteria had genes. Also, the method of nutritional selection was used to pick out rare genotypes from mixed populations. As our conversations with Lederberg pursued and refined the understanding of the four (4) approaches and related them to famous scientists and inventors, Lederberg exclaimed “How delightful to find this deep connection between Einstein, Edison, and others who have inspired me!”

to George Pake, the founder of PARC, who passed away on March 4, 2004.

(Stefik, Mark., Breakthrough : stories and strategies of radical innovation / Mark Stefik and Barbara Stefik., 1. technological innovation., 2. inventions., 2004, )

____________________________________

p.86

Looking down at his wooden platter, at the underside of an octopus's leg, he thought a similar suction cup might work on the sole of a runner's flat. Bowerman filed that away. Inspiration, he learned, can come from quotidian things. Things you might eat. Or find lying around the house.

(Phil Knight, Shoe dog : a memoir by the creator of nike / phil knight, 2016, 338.7688 Knight, p.86 )

____________________________________

Sebastian Mallaby., The Man Who Knew: the life and times of Alan Greenspan,

2016

p.666

“Where did you make a mistake?” he insisted.

“I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interest of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms”, Greenspan offered.

p.666

“So the problem here is something which looked to be a very solid edifice ... did break down. And I think that, as I said, shocked me.”

“Do you have any personal responsibility for the financial crisis?” Waxman asked.

pp.666-667

Greenspan set off on a new tack, seeking to put the record straight about his dealing with Edward Gramlich. He still spoke in the same mesmerizing way: he was dense, circuitous, and difficult to follow; yet somehow his listeners were encouraged to believe that the difficulty was their fault.

p.667

Five, ten, or fifteen years earlier, the magic of his manner might have worked ── Waxman himself had fallen under Greenspan's spell occasionally.

pp.667-668

p.667

“Dr. Greenspan, I am going to interrupt you”, the congressman broke in. “You had an ideology. You had a belief.” Then he quoted Greenspan's own admission on this score. “I do have an ideology”, Greenspan had once said. “My judgment is that free, competitive markets are by far the unrivaled way to organize economies. We have tried regulation, none meaningfully worked.”

“That was your quote”, Waxman delared ... . “You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others. And now our whole economy is paying the price. Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”

p.667

an exaggeration of the Fed's power to enforce lending standards at nonbanks;

an exaggeration of the force with which Edward Gramlich had spoken; and

an exaggeration of the link between reckless mortgage lending and the collapse of leveraged finance. But his question was a master stroke.

p.667

Ideology, Greenspan explained earnestly, was “a conceptual framework ... [governing] ... the way people deal with reality

“Everyone has one”, Greenspan continued. “You have to. To exist, you need an ideology.

“The question is, whether is it accurate or not. What I am saying to you is, yes, I found a flaw, I don't know how significant or permanent it is, but I have been very distressed by that fact.”

p.668

It was an unremarkable observation. Of course, all ideologies had flaws; the fact that Greenspan had acknowledged his went only to show his pragmatism. By the same token, the opposite ideology had flaws.

p.668

How often had regulation failed?

Would proregulation ideologues match Greenspan's honesty in acknowledging the fissures in their framework?

In Greenspan's understanding, the statement that his ideology was flawed was almost a statement of the obvious.

Having offered his token philosophic concession, Greenspan wanted to return to the matter of Edward Gramlich.

p.668

“But if I may, may I just finish an answer to the question ──” Greenspan began.

“You found a flaw?” Waxman interrupted.

“A flaw, a flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works, so to speak”, Greenspan confirmed. He was impatient to move on to his next argument.

“In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working?” Waxman said.

p.668

“Precisely”, Greenspan acknowledged. “That's precisely the reason I was shocked, because I had been going for forty years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptional well.”44

p.754 notes

28. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, “The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report: The Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States” (Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, January 2011), 150-53, http://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/fcic-reports/fcic_final_report_full.pdf.

33. W. C. Varones, Greenspan's Body Count, n.d., http://greenspansbodycount.blogspot.com/.

42. “Had AIG been building derivatives exposures on-exchange rather than in the OTC markets, its reckless speculation would have been brought to a halt much earlier owing to minute-by-minute exposure tracking in the clearing house and unambiguous mark-to-market and margining rules.” See Benn Steil, “Derivatives Clearing houses: Opportunities and Challenges”: prepared statement by Dr. Benn Steil before the committee on banking, housing, and urban affairs; subcommittee on securities, insurance, and investment, May 25, 2001.

43. ... risk management at hedge funds ... the unaided survival of the hedge fund Citadel is instructive.

Sebatian Mallaby, “The Code Breakers”, chapter 13 in More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite (New York: Penguin Group, 2010).

Sebatian Mallaby, More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite, 2010

44. House committee on oversight and government reform,

The financial crisis and the role of federal regulators: hearing before the committee on oversight and government reform, 2008,

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-110hhrg55764/html/CHRG-110hhrg55764.htm.

45. Steve Coll, “The Whole Intellectual Edifice”, New Yorker, October 23, 2008, http://www.newyorker.com/news/steve-coll/the-whole-intellectual-edifice.

47. Paul R. Krugman, “How did economists get it so wrong?”, New York Times Magazine, September 2, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.

48.

50. Under questioning by Brooksley Born, Greenspan did reiterate his view that capital buffers should be thickened. “We were undercapitalizing the banking system probably for 40 or 50 years, and that has to be adjusted.” The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Hearing (Washington, D.C., 2010).

(The Man Who Knew: the life and times of Alan Greenspan / Sebastian Mallaby.

New York: Penguin Press, 2016., “A council on foreign relations book.”, subjects: Greenspan, Alan, 1926─ | Economists──united states──biography. | government economists──united states──biography.| monetary policy ── united states. | board of governors of the federal resere system (u.s.), HB119.G74 M35 2016 (print), HB119.G74 (ebook), 332.1/1092 [B]──dc23, https://lccn.loc.gov/2016017300, 2016, )

____________________________________

Joshua Cooper Ramo (author), The seventh sense (book), 2016

pp.276-80

Pattie Maes

p.276

When I first met her, in the 1990s, she was in charge of much of the work on artificial intelligence (AI) at MIT's Media Lab, Danny Hillis's old home.

p.276

he introduced me to a puzzle of her field that has stayed on my mind in the year since. It is called the disappearing AI problem.

p.276

Back in the 1990s, ..., Maes and her team were tinkering with what was known as computer-aided prediction.

pp.276-277

Maes intended to design a computer that could ask, for instance, what movie stars you like. “Robert Redford”, you'd type. And then the machine would spit back some films you might enjoy. The Paul Newman classic Cool Hand Luke, for instance.

p.277

And, well, you had liked that film. This seemed magic, just the sort of data-meets-human question that showcased a machin learning and thinking. An honestly artificial intelligence. Maes hoped to design a computer that could predict what moview or music or books you or I might enjoy. (And, of course, buy.)

p.277

A recommendation engine.

p.277

But to confidently bridge your knowledge of a friend's taste and the nearly endless library of moview and songs and books? Beyond human capacity. It seemed an ideal job for a thoughtful machine.

The traditional approach to such a problem was to devise a formula that would mimic your friend. What are his hobbies? What areas interest him? What cheers him up? Then you'd program a machine to jump just as deep into movies and music and books, to break them down by plot and type of character to see what might fit your friend's interests.

p.277

But after years building programs that tried ── and failed ── to tackle the recommendation problem in this fashion, the MIT group changed tack.

p.277

Instead of teaching a machine to understand you (or Tolstoy), they simply began compiling data about what movies and music and books people liked. Then they looked for patterns. People were not, they discoverd, all that unique.

p.277

Pretty much everyone who liked Redford in Downhill Racer loved Newman in The Hustler. Anyone who enjoyed Radiohead's Kid A could be directed safely to Sigur Rós's Ágaetis Byrjun.

pp.277-278

Maes and her team found themselves, as a result, less focused on the mechanics of making a machine think than on devising formulas to organize, store, and probe data.

p.278

What had begun as a problem of artificial intelligence became, in the end, a puzzle of mathematics.

p.278

The mystery of human thought, that great, unknowable sea of chemicals and instinct and experience that would have let you place your finger on just the song to open the heart of your date, had been unlocked by data. Here was the disappearing AI problem. A puzzle that looked like it needed computer intelligence demanded, in the end, merely math. The AI had disappeared.

p.278

Many problems that once seemed to demand the miracle of thought really only needed data.

Joshua Cooper Ramo, The seventh sense: power, fortune, and survival in the age of network, 2016.

____________________________________

Managing yourself

How Will You Measure Your Life?

Don’t reserve your best business thinking for your career.

Clayton M. Christensen (April 6, 1952 – January 23, 2020)

From the Magazine (July–August 2010) · Long read

Summary.

· .... ... .... ·

How can I be happy in my career?

How can I be sure that my relationship with my family is an enduring source of happiness?

And how can I live my life with integrity?

The answer to the first question comes from Frederick Herzberg’s assertion that the most powerful motivator isn’t money; it’s the opportunity to learn, grow in responsibilities, contribute, and be recognized. That’s why management, if practiced well, can be the noblest of occupations; no others offer as many ways to help people find those opportunities. It isn’t about buying, selling, and investing in companies, as many think.

The principles of resource allocation can help people attain happiness at home. If not managed masterfully, what emerges from a firm’s resource allocation process can be very different from the strategy management intended to follow. That’s true in life too: If you’re not guided by a clear sense of purpose, you’re likely to fritter away your time and energy on obtaining the most tangible, short-term signs of achievement, not what’s really important to you.

And just as a focus on marginal costs can cause bad corporate decisions, it can lead people astray. The marginal cost of doing something wrong “just this once” always seems alluringly low. You don’t see the end result to which that path leads. The key is to define what you stand for and draw the line in a safe place.

· .... ... .... ·

Before I published The Innovatorʼs Dilemma, I got a call from Andrew Grove, then the chairman of Intel. He had read one of my early papers about disruptive technology, and he asked if I could talk to his direct reports and explain my research and what it implied for Intel. Excited, I flew to Silicon Valley and showed up at the appointed time, only to have Grove say, “Look, stuff has happened. We have only 10 minutes for you. Tell us what your model of disruption means for Intel.” I said that I couldn't — that I needed a full 30 minutes to explain the model, because only with it as context would any comments about Intel make sense. Ten minutes into my explanation, Grove interrupted: “Look, Iʼve got your model. Just tell us what it means for Intel.”

I insisted that I needed 10 more minutes to describe how the process of disruption had worked its way through a very different industry, steel, so that he and his team could understand how disruption worked. I told the story of how Nucor and other steel minimills had begun by attacking the lowest end of the market—steel reinforcing bars, or rebar—and later moved up toward the high end, undercutting the traditional steel mills.

When I finished the minimill story, Grove said, “OK, I get it. What it means for Intel is...,” and then went on to articulate what would become the companyʼs strategy for going to the bottom of the market to launch the Celeron processor.

I've thought about that a million times since. If I had been suckered into telling Andy Grove what he should think about the microprocessor business, Iʼd have been killed. But instead of telling him what to think, I taught him how to think—and then he reached what I felt was the correct decision on his own.

That experience had a profound influence on me. When people ask what I think they should do, I rarely answer their question directly. Instead, I run the question aloud through one of my models. Iʼll describe how the process in the model worked its way through an industry quite different from their own. And then, more often than not, theyʼll say, “OK, I get it.” And theyʼll answer their own question more insightfully than I could have.

My class at HBS is structured to help my students understand what good management theory is and how it is built. To that backbone I attach different models or theories that help students think about the various dimensions of a general managerʼs job in stimulating innovation and growth. In each session we look at one company through the lenses of those theories—using them to explain how the company got into its situation and to examine what managerial actions will yield the needed results.

On the last day of class, I ask my students to turn those theoretical lenses on themselves, to find cogent answers to three questions:

First, how can I be sure that Iʼll be happy in my career?

Second, how can I be sure that my relationships with my spouse and my family become an enduring source of happiness?

Third, how can I be sure Iʼll stay out of jail?

Though the last question sounds lighthearted, itʼs not. Two of the 32 people in my Rhodes scholar class spent time in jail. Jeff Skilling of Enron fame was a classmate of mine at HBS. These were good guys—but something in their lives sent them off in the wrong direction.

.... ... ....

source:

https://hbr.org/2010/07/how-will-you-measure-your-life

http://hbr.org/2010/07/how-will-you-measure-your-life/ar/pr

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https://hbr.org/2010/07/how-will-you-measure-your-life

____________________________________

• Indeed, we shall define work as any process that is equivalent to the raising of a weight. Later, as this theory develops, we shall use our increased insight to build more general definitions and find the most all-embracing definition right at the end. That is one of the delights of science: the more deeply a concept is understood, the more widely it casts its net.

• as [the] theory develops, we shall use our increased insight to build more general definitions and find the most all-embracing definition ... . That is ... the delights of science: the more deeply a concept is understood, the more widely [a concept] casts its net.

source:

The second law

P. W. Atkins

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/1308474.The_Second_Law

The Second Law

(Scientific American Library Series #10)

by Peter Atkins

All natural change is subject to one law. It's the second law of thermodynamics. In this volume, the acclaimed chemist and science writer P. W. Atkins shows how this single, simple principal of energy transformation accounts for all natural change. Moving from the steam engine to the nuclear age, the narrative is full of vivid examples, ideas, and images - but virtually no mathematics.

https://blas.com/the-second-law/

The Second Law by PW Atkins

Summary

PW Atkins’ beautiful book, The Second Law, defines what the second law means and how it impacts every facet of the world and our lives

Key Takeaways

1.The Laws of Thermodynamics

1. The name thermodynamics is a blunderbuss term originally denoting the study of heat, but now extended to include the study of the transformation of energy in all its forms. It is based on a few statements that constitute succinct summaries of people’s experiences with the way that energy behaves in the course of its transformations. These summaries are The Laws of Thermodynamics. Although we shall be primarily concerned with just one of these laws, it will be useful to have at least a passing familiarity with all of them. There are four laws. The third of them, the second law, was recognized first; the first, the zeroth law, was formulated last; the first law was second; the third law might not even be a law in the same sense as the others

1. Zeroth Law

1. The zeroth Law was a kind of logical afterthought. Formulated by about 1931, it deals with the possibility of defining the temperature of things. Temperature is one of the deepest concepts of thermodynamics, and I hope this book will sharpen your insight into its elusive nature. Simply, around thermal equilibrium and

2. First Law

1. The first law is popularly stated as “energy is conserved.”

3. Second Law

1. The second law recognizes that there is a fundamental dissymmetry in Nature: the rest of this book is focused on that dissymmetry. All around us are aspects of that dissymmetry: hot objects cool, but cool objects do not spontaneously become hot; a bouncing ball comes to rest, but a stationary ball does not spontaneously begin to bounce. Although the total quantity of energy must be conserved in any process, the distribution of that energy changes in an irreversible manner. The second law is concerned with the natural direction of change of the distribution of energy, something that is quite independent of its total quantity

2. Energy drops from the hot source to the cold sink, and is conserved; but because we have set up this flow from hot to cold, we are able to draw only some energy off as work; so not all the energy drops into the cold. The cold sink appears to be essential, for only if it is available can we set up the energy fall, and draw off some as work. In every engine, there has to be a cold sink, and that at some stage of the cycle energy must be discarded into it. That little mouse of experience is nothing other than the second law of thermodynamics. All the law seems to be saying is that heat cannot be completely converted into work in a cyclic engine: some has to be discarded into a cold sink. That is, we appear to have identified a fundamental tax: Nature accepts the equivalence of heat and work, but demands a contribution whenever heat is converted into work. Note the dissymmetry. Nature does not tax the conversion of work into heat: we may fritter away our hard-won work by friction, and do so completely. It is only heat that cannot be so converted. Heat is taxed; work is not.

1. No process is possible in which the sole result is the absorption of heat from a reservoir and its complete conversion into work.

2. Similarly, no process is possible in which the sole result is the transfer of energy from a cooler to a hotter body (flow from cold to hot is possible but not natural. Only the spontaneous shift of heat from cold to hot without there being change elsewhere is against nature..)

3. Natural processes are accompanied by an increase in the entropy of the universe.

3. The domain of the second law is corruption and decay

([ work and heat are names of methods, not names of things (NOT a person, NOT a place, NOT a thing, a method) ])

([ work and heat are names relating to the transfer of energy ])

([ heat is a name of methods ])

([ heat is relating to the transfer of energy ])

([ heat means to transfer energy in a special way ])

([ heat is not a form of energy: it is a method of transferring energy ])

4. One of the most important contributions of 19th century thermodynamics is our comprehension that work and heat are names of methods, not names of things…Both heat and work are terms relating to the transfer of energy. To heat an object means to transfer energy in a special way (making use of a temperature difference between the hot and the heated). To cool an object is the negative of heating it: energy is transferred out of the object under the influence of a difference in temperature between the cold and the cooled. It is most important to realize, and to remember throughout the following pages, that heat is not a form of energy: it is the name of a method of transferring energy. The same is true of work. Work is what you do when you need to change the energy of an object by a means that does not involve temperature difference. Thus, lifting a weight from the floor and moving a truck to the top of a hill involves work. Like heat, work is not a form of energy: it is the name of a method for transferring energy.

5. Work into Quality

1. Suppose we have a certain amount of energy that we can draw from a hot source, and an engine to convert it into work. We know that the second law demands that we have a cold sink too; so we arrange for the engine to operate in the usual way. We can extract the appropriate quantity of work, and pay our tax to Nature by dumping a contribution of energy as heat into the cold sink. The energy we have dumped into the cold sink is then no longer available for doing work (unless we happen to have an even colder reservoir available). Therefore, in some sense, energy stored at a high temperature has a better “quality”: high-quality energy is available for doing work; low-quality energy, corrupted energy, is less available for doing work…Just as the increasing entropy of the universe is the signpost of natural change and corresponds to energy being stored at ever-lower temperatures, so we can say that the natural direction of change is the one that causes the quality of energy to decline: the natural processes of the world are manifestations of this corruption of quality

2. Here is our first major result of thermodynamics: we now know how to minimize the heat we throw away: we keep the cold sink as cold as possible, and the hot source as hot as possible. That is why modern power stations use superheated steam: cold sinks are hard to come by; so the most economical procedure is to use as hot a source as possible. That is, the designer aims to use the highest-quality energy…There appears to be a limit to the lowness of temperature. The conversion efficiency of heat to work cannot exceed unity, for otherwise the first law would be contravened…Absolute zero appears to be unattainable

1. Hottest possible source, coldest possible sink. This contrast offers the most efficient system

2. Some deep thread with velocity, friction, superheated sources and super cooled sinks

3. Quality must reflect the absence of chaos. High-quality energy must be undispersed energy, energy that is highly localized (as in a lump of coal or a nucleus of an atom); it may also be energy that is stored in the coherent motion of atoms (as in the flow of water)

6. When we do work on a system, we are stimulating its particles with coherent motion; when we heat a system, we are stimulating its particles with incoherent motion

1. Deep thread with coherence, superfluidity, work

7. Thermal equilibrium corresponds to the most probable state of the universe…So long as a process is occurring in which more chaos is generated than is being destroyed, then the balance of the energy may be withdrawn as coherent motion…The state of more chaos can allow greater coherence locally, so long as greater dissipation has occurred elsewhere…Order on any scale can arise from collapse into chaos: order springs locally from disorder elsewhere. Such is the spring of change.

8. Chaos determines not only destiny but also the rate at which that destiny is achieved

4. Third Law

1. The third law of thermodynamics deals with the properties of matter at very low temperatures. It states that we cannot bring matter to a temperature of absolute zero in a finite number of steps.

1. Fluid flows from a hot, thermally “high” source to a cold, thermally “low” sink

2. Other

1. Work and heat are mutually inter-convertible, and heat is not a substance like water

2. An engine is something that converts heat into work. Work is a process such as raising a weight. Indeed, we shall define work as any process that is equivalent to the raising of a weight. Later, as this theory develops, we shall use our increased insight to build more general definitions and find the most all-embracing definition right at the end. That is one of the delights of science: the more deeply a concept is understood, the more widely it casts its net.

1. Work is a way of transferring energy between a system and its surroundings; it is a transfer effected in such a way that a weight could be raised in the surroundings as a result. When work is done on a system, the change in the surroundings is equivalent to the lowering of a weight.

3. The godfathers of the field are Kelvin, Clausius, Carnot, and Boltzmann

What I got out of it

1. The last half was a bit too technical for me but there were a couple fundamental ideas which were clarified around the second law of thermodynamics. Two of the biggest, for me, are that quality of energy = capacity for work (think this is a fascinating way to think about the elusive idea of “quality”) and the idea that the larger the contrast between the hot source and the cold sink, the more efficient the system is (this is an idea which can be applied to every facet of your life…seek out contrast…, aka competitive advantage…)

sub-source:

Tim Ferriss, Tools of Titans, 2017 [ ]

p.322

The second law

P. W. Atkins

Chris Young

chefsteps.com

p.322

One of the books that Chris has found himself gifting a lot is an out-of-print book on thermodynamics called The Second Law.

“It was written by an Oxford physical chemistry professor named P. W. Atkins. That book is just an phenomenal, casual, infographic-laden read on how the world works from an energy perspective. I found that so incredibly useful in trying to understand how to do something, how to make something work, whether something's even possible. It's frequently my bullshit detector.”

(Tim Ferriss, Tools of Titans, 2017, 081 Ferriss, )

____________________________________

https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/2007-usc-law-school-commencement-address-by-charlie-munger

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/2007-usc-law-school-commencement-address-by-charlie-munger

“2007 USC Law School Commencement Address”

delivered by Charlie Munger

Background

This speech was delivered as the commencement address to the graduates of the University of Southern California Law School on May 13, 2007.

Speech Transcript

... ... ...

Well, I could see from that one sentence that was perfectly ridiculous, and it pushed me further into my natural drift, which was into learning all the big ideas and all the big disciplines so I wouldn’t be a perfect damn fool who was trying to think about one aspect of something that couldn’t be removed from the totality of the situation in a constructive fashion. And what I noted, since the really big ideas carry 95 percent of the freight, it wasn’t at all that hard for me to pick up all the big ideas and all the big disciplines and make them a standard part of my mental routines.

Once you have the ideas, of course, they are no good if you don’t practice. You don’t practice, you lose it.

... ... ...

I think the game of life, in many respects, is getting a lot of practice into the hands of the people that have the most aptitude to learn and the most tendency to be learning machines. And if you want the very highest reaches of human civilization, that’s where you have to go. You do not want to choose a brain surgeon for your child among fifty applicants, all of them just take turns during the procedure. You don’t want your airplanes designed that way. You don’t want your Berkshire Hathaway’s run that way. You want to get the power into the right people.

I frequently tell the story of Max Planck, when he won the Nobel prize and went around Germany giving lectures on quantum mechanics. And the chauffeur gradually memorized the lecture and he said, “Would you mind, professor Planck, just because it's so boring staying in our routines, would you mind if I gave the lecture this time and you just sat in front with my chauffeur's hat?” And Planck said, “Sure.”

And the chauffeur got up and he gave this long lecture on quantum mechanics, after which a physics professor stood up in the rear and asked a perfectly ghastly question. And the chauffeur said, “Well, I'm surprised that in an advanced city like Munich I get such an elementary question. I'm going to ask my chauffeur to reply.”

Well, the reason I tell that story is not entirely to celebrate the quick wittiness of the protagonist. In this world, we have two kinds of knowledge. One is Planck knowledge—the people who really know. They've paid the dues, they have the aptitude.

([ They've paid the dues, they have [learned and earned] the aptitude.])

Then, we've got chauffeur knowledge—they have learned to prattle the talk and they have a big head of hair. They may have fine timbre in the voice. They really make a hell of an impression. But in the end, they've got chauffeur knowledge. I think I've just described practically every politician in the United States.

And you are going to have the problem in your life of getting the responsibility to the people with the Planck knowledge and away for the people who have the chauffeur knowledge. And there are huge forces working against you.

... ... ...

The last idea that I want to give you, as you go out into a profession that frequently puts a lot of procedure, and a lot of precautions, and a lot of mumbo-jumbo into what it does, this is not the highest form which civilization can reach. The highest form that civilization can reach is a seamless web of deserved trust. Not much procedure, just totally reliable people correctly trusting one another.

That's the way an operating room works at the Mayo Clinic. If a bunch of lawyers were to introduce a lot of process, the patients would all die. So never forget, when you're a lawyer, that you may be rewarded for selling this stuff, but you don't have to buy it. In your own life, what you want is a seamless web of deserved trust. And if your proposed marriage contract has forty-seven pages, my suggestion is you not enter.

... ... ...

About the Author

James Clear writes about habits, decision making, and continuous improvement. He is the author of the #1 New York Times bestseller, Atomic Habits. The book has sold over 7 million copies worldwide and has been translated into more than 50 languages.

source:

https://fs.blog/peter-bevelin-seeking-wisdom/

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https://fs.blog/peter-bevelin-seeking-wisdom/#genesis-content

sub-source:

Tim Ferriss, Tools of Titans, 2017 [ ]

p.184

Derek Sivers, Anything you want

a collection of short life lessons

p.185

Seeking Wisdom: From Darwin to Munger, by Peter Bevelin

(Tim Ferriss, Tools of Titans, 2017, 081 Ferriss, )

____________________________________