2,360 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. All these types have a right to do as theyplease or as they must; they have no right to impose in then a m e of science such narrow limits on others.

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. In 1990, 15.1 percent of the poor were residingin high- poverty neighborhoods. That figure dropped to 10.3 percent by 2000,rose to 13.6 percent for 2010, and then fell to 11.9 percent for 2015.

      Is there a long term correlation between these rates and political parties? Is there a potential lag time between the two if there is?

  2. Sep 2022
    1. Science has provided the swiftest communicationbetween individuals; it has provided a record of ideas andhas enabled man to manipulate and to make extracts fromthat record so that knowledge evolves and endures through-out the life of a race rather than that of an individual

      I believe especially the evolution of technology and new devices made this transition and provision of "the swiftest communication between individuals" possible. For the advancement of knowledge, the sharing and transferring of knowledge is the most important, so this transition was extremely important.

    1. wissenschaft

      roughly translated as the systematic pursuit of knowledge, learning, and scholarship (especially in contrast with application).

      It was roughly similar to our current "science" but retains a broader meaning which includes the humanities.

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

    1. which is why we model the future as something we can influence.

      Yeah, but those who would model the future for the sake of influencing it are driven to do so because they have no free well. And similarly, there are people who will patently refuse to pursue such an approach because they are driven to it by their lack of free will.

    2. Given our lack of complete microscopic information, the question we should be asking is, "does the best theory of human beings include an element of free choice?"

      This is a good question. And we don't need to be able to predict the future to answer it.

    3. The problem with this is that it mixes levels of description. If we know the exact quantum state of all of our atoms and forces, in principle Laplace's Demon can predict our future. But we don't know that, and we never will, and therefore who cares? What we are trying to do is to construct an effective understanding of human beings, not of electrons and nuclei.

      This is a non-sequitur. Being able to predict the future is irrelevant. What matters is that whatever we do will be "determined" by the laws of physics and the state of the system at the moment of a decision.

    4. The consequence argument points out that deterministic laws imply that the future isn't really up for grabs; it's determined by the present state just as surely as the past is. So we don't really have choices about anything.

      Yup, that makes sense to me. I'm fine with that too.

      Still, however, everyone is ignoring the influence of learning on our future state.

    5. while we can still influence later times

      But can we? If there's no libertarian free will, then we cannot influence the future because we cannot choose to do differently than we will have done.

    6. Of course, just because it can be compatible with the laws of nature, doesn't mean that the concept of free will actually is the best way to talk about emergent human behaviors.

      And that's the crux of the matter. Knowing that free will is only constructed, we can decide it would be best to not base certain decisions on its existence. For instance, how we deal with crime and punishment.

      Of course, if there's no free will, then there are some people who will never accept it's non-existence.

    7. The concept of baseball is emergent rather than fundamental, but it's no less real for all of that. Likewise for free will. We can be perfectly orthodox materialists and yet believe in free will, if what we mean by that is that there is a level of description that is useful in certain contexts and that includes "autonomous agents with free will" as crucial ingredients.

      Again, the problem here is that we can define and characterize baseball such that we can unequivocally say that a given entity either is or is not "baseball".

      But we cannot do that for free will - because we cannot measure it.

      Carroll is also being quite utilitarian, which is fine. My idea is that considering the utility of a concept only matters for emergent properties because they are constructed and not fundamental. The fundamentals have no utility; they just are.

    8. When we talk about air in a room, we can describe it by listing the properties of each and every molecule, or we speak in coarse-grained terms about things like temperature and pressure. One description is more "fundamental," in that its regime of validity is wider; but both have a regime of validity, and as long as we are in that regime, the relevant concepts have a perfectly good claim to "existing."

      Another way of saying this is that temperature and pressure are emergent properties of the more fundamental properties of the molecules of air.

      The problem with applying this to free will, though, is that unlike temperature, we have no way to measure free will. If we can't measure it, I am quite comfortable in denying this analogy.

    9. But in either event, they believe that our freedom of choice cannot be reduced to our constituent particles evolving according to the laws of physics.

      But why would they believe something so silly?

    10. There are people who do believe in free will in this sense; that we need to invoke a notion of free will as an essential ingredient in reality, over and above the conventional laws of nature. These are libertarians, in the metaphysical sense rather than the political-philosophy sense.

      A good way to characterize free will from a purely scientific point of view.

    11. When people make use of a concept and simultaneously deny its existence, what they typically mean is that the concept in question is nowhere to be found in some "fundamental" description of reality.

      Yes! This is very important. Recognizing that "race" is constructed rather than fundamental is the first step to recognizing the race is irrelevant, and that it can be jettisoned from our reasoning. Similarly, once we can see that "free will" is constructed and not fundamental, we can get past its philosophical shackles.

    12. Likewise, people who question the existence of free will don't have any trouble making choices.

      And there's the problem: do we really make choices? Or are we just unaware of the deterministic algorithm making the choice for us?

    13. It's possible to deny the existence of something while using it all the time. Julian Barbour doesn't believe time is real, but he is perfectly capable of showing up to a meeting on time.

      This is the difference between a social construct and a distinct physical phenomenon. In this regard, “time” is like “race”.

    1. Anecdotally, we hear stories of university and research bureaux deliberately adding researchers in North America or Asia to consortia because those researchers will be able to do basic text and data mining so much more easily than in the EU.

      contentmining (github.com/contentmining) is restricted in the EU so universiteies outsource this to asian countries...

  3. Aug 2022
    1. The Hypothesis Project is a 501(c)(3) with a mission to enable a conversation layer over the world’s knowledge. We envision a universal capability, native to browsers and other applications, allowing notetaking, collaboration, conversation and community over all forms of content– all without needing implementation by
    1. Krause, P. R., Fleming, T. R., Peto, R., Longini, I. M., Figueroa, J. P., Sterne, J. A. C., Cravioto, A., Rees, H., Higgins, J. P. T., Boutron, I., Pan, H., Gruber, M. F., Arora, N., Kazi, F., Gaspar, R., Swaminathan, S., Ryan, M. J., & Henao-Restrepo, A.-M. (2021). Considerations in boosting COVID-19 vaccine immune responses. The Lancet, 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02046-8

    1. While the admin-istrative scientist Luhmann ignores the librarian’s dictum in his consideration of theproper paper for the project out of spatial concerns, DIN 1504, which, apart from theInternational Library Format, only allows DIN A 6 and DIN A 7 for “literature cards,”18regrettably goes unused.

      Despite his career as an administrative scientist, Luhmann eschewed the International Library Format which allows for DIN A6 and DIN A7 for "literature cards."

      Cross reference:

      1. See Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V. (DIN), Publikation und Dokumentation 2. Erschließung von Dokumenten, Informationsverarbeitung, Reprographie, Bibliotheksverwaltung, Normen, vol. 154 of DIN-Taschenbuch , 2nd ed. (Berlin, Kö ln: Beuth, 1984), 64f.

      link to https://hypothes.is/a/hKgd_t1jEeyxoxOujPZNkg

    1. "PDF is where documents go to die. Once something is in PDF, it's like a roach motel for data."

      —Chris Pratley, Microsoft Office's general manager (in TechRadar, 2012)

      obvious bias here on part of Pratley...

      Oddly, even if this were true, I'm not seeing patterns in the wild by which Microsoft products are helping to dramatically accelerate the distribution and easy ability to re-use data within documents. Perhaps its happening within companies or organizations to some extent, but it's not happening within the broader commons of the internet.


      If .pdfs are where information goes to die, then perhaps tools like Hypothes.is are meant to help resurrect that information?

    1. Whitehead once described the mentality of modern science as having beenforged through “the union of passionate interest in the detailed facts with equaldevotion to abstract generalization.”
    2. seventeenth century, “the century ofgenius,”
    1. History and Foundations of Information Science

      This series of books focuses on the historical approach or theoretical approach to information science and seeks a broader interpretation of what we consider as information (i.e., information is in the eye of the beholder, be it sets of data, scholarly publications, works of art, material objects, or DNA samples), and an emphasis upon how people access and interact with this information.

      https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/series/history-and-foundations-information-science

    1. Neurath claimed that magic was unfalsifiable and therefore disenchantment could never be complete in a scientific age.[18]
      1. Josephson-Storm, Jason (2017). The Myth of Disenchantment: Magic, Modernity, and the Birth of the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 227. ISBN 978-0-226-40336-6.
    1. OCLC began automated catalog card production in 1971, when the shared cataloging system first went online. Cardproduction increased to its peak in 1985, when OCLC printed 131 million. At peak production, OCLC routinelyshipped 8 tons of cards each week, or some 4,000 packages. Card production steadily decreased since then asmore and more libraries began replacing their printed cards with electronic catalogs. OCLC has printed more than1.9 billion catalog cards since 1971.
    2. DUBLIN, Ohio, October 1, 2015 —OCLC printed its last library catalog cards today, officially closing the book onwhat was once a familiar resource for generations of information seekers who now use computer catalogs andonline search engines to access library collections around the world.
    1. thus paved the way for the realisation that the Earth system is a real object comprising ‘physical, chemical, biological and human components’ and seen as ‘a related set of interacting processes operating on a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, rather than as a collection of individual components’

      Diese Definition liegt auch dem Erdsystemwissenschaften-Konzept der Leopoldina zugrunde.

    1. Australian Institute of Marine Science’s annual long-term monitoring report says the fast-growing corals that have driven coral cover upwards are also those most at risk from marine heatwaves, storms and the voracious crown-of-thorns (COTS) starfish

      Gehört auch zum Thema Hitzewellen

  4. Jul 2022
    1. Computer science is the subject that studies what computers can do and investigates the best ways you can solve the problems of the world with them. It is a huge field overlapping pure mathematics, engineering and many other scientific disciplines. In this video I summarise as much of the subject as I can and show how the areas are related to each other. #computer #science #DomainOfScience
    1. Because I wanted to make use of a unified version of the overall universe of knowledge as a structural framework, I ended up using the Outline of Knowledge (OoK) in the Propædia volume that was part of Encyclopedia Britannica 15th edition, first published 1974, the final version of which (2010) is archived at -- where else? -- the Internet Archive.

      The Outline of Knowledge appears in the Propædia volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica. It is similar to various olther classification systems like the Dewey Decimal system or the Universal Decimal Classification.

    1. Die Leopoldina fordert eine Umorganisation der Erdwissenschaften in Deutschland im Sinne der Erdsystemwissenschaften, um wirkungsvoller vor allem gegen die globale Erhitzung vorgehen zu können.

    1. Yet not all of the sciences use (or require) mathematics to the same extent, for example, the lifesciences. There, the descriptive, analytical methods of Aristotle remain important, as does the(somewhat casual) recourse to final causes.

      Is the disappearance of the Aristotelian final cause in modern science part of the reason for the rise of an anti-science perspective for the religious right in 21st century America?

      People would seem to want or need a purpose to underlie their lives or they otherwise seem to be left adrift.

      Why are things the way they are? What are they for?

      Is the question: "why?" really so strong?

    2. Mechanical and vitalist systems existed concurrently, and although it might seem easy to distinguish them,when we come to look at most specific characters and their thought, the distinctions appear blurred

      Mechanical philosophy and vitalism were popular and co-existed on a non-mutually exclusive spectrum in the seventeenth century.

      Mechanical philosophy is a philosophy of nature which arose broadly in the 17th century and sought to explain all natural phenomenon in terms of matter and motion without relying on "action at a distance" or the idea of a cause and effect that occurred without any physical contact or direct motivation.

      René Descartes, Pierre Gassendi, and Marin Mersenne all held mechanistic viewpoints.

      See also: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_philosophy

      Link to: - spooky action at a distance (quantum mechanics)

    3. This perspective has been called an “emblematic worldview”; it is clearly visible in the iconography ofmedieval and Renaissance art, for example. Plants and animals are not merely specimens, as in modernscience; they represent a huge raft of associated things and ideas.

      Medieval culture had imbued its perspective of the natural world with a variety of emblematic associations. Plants and animals were not simply specimens or organisms in the world but were emblematic representations of ideas which were also associated with them.

      example: peacock / pride

      Did this perspective draw from some of the older possibly pagan forms of orality and mnemonics? Or were the potential associations simply natural ones which (re-?)grew either historically or as the result of the use of the art of memory from antiquity?

    4. Humanist critiques began to erode Pliny—the major source for natural history since antiquity—in the1490s. The lengthy critiques of Ermolao Barbaro (1454–1493) and Niccolò Leoniceno (1428–1524) were,however, based on Greek texts prior to Pliny, not on the natural world.

      Pliny's work had been the standard text for natural history since antiquity. The early humanist movement including critiques by Ermolao Barbaro and Niccolò Leoniceno in the mid 1400s began to erode his stature in the area. Interestingly however, it wasn't new discoveries or science that was displacing Pliny so much as comparison of Pliny with even earlier Greek texts.

    1. An instance may be given of the necessity of the “ separate sheet ” system.Among the many sources of information from which we constructed our bookThe Manor and the Borough were the hundreds of reports on particular boroughsmade by the Municipal Corporation Commissioners in 1835 .These four hugevolumes are well arranged and very fully indexed; they were in our own possession;we had read them through more than once; and we had repeatedly consulted themon particular points. We had, in fact, used them as if they had been our own boundnotebooks, thinking that this would suffice. But, in the end, we found ourselvesquite unable to digest and utilise this material until we had written out every oneof the innumerable facts on a separate sheet of paper, so as to allow of the mechanicalabsorption of these sheets among our other notes; of their complete assortment bysubjects; and of their being shuffled and reshuffled to test hypotheses as to suggestedco-existences and sequences.

      Webb's use case here sounds like she's got the mass data, but that what she really desired was a database which she could more easily query to do her work and research. As a result, she took the flat file data and made it into a manually sortable and searchable database.

    1. https://udcsummary.info/php/index.php?lang=en

      Interesting defined vocabulary and concatenation/auxiliary signs for putting ideas into proximity.

      Could be useful for note taking. Probably much harder to get people to adopt this sort of thing with shared notes/note taking however.

      Somewhat similar to the Dewey Decimal classification system.

    1. Perhaps the most widely recognized failing of peer review is its inability to ensure the identification of high-quality work.

      stakesinscience

    1. It draws together data scientists, experimental and statistical methodologists, and open science activists into a project with both intellectual and policy dimensions.

      open science activists

    2. detail the scientific ideology that is apparent in its articles, strategy statements, and research projects,

      ideology in science

    1. when we attribute sensory experiences to 00:06:39 ourselves for instance like the experience of red or the experience of seeing blue the model is external properties and we think of there as being inner properties just like those external properties that somehow we are 00:06:52 um we are seeing immediately

      This comment suggests a Color BEing Journey. How can we demonstrate in a compelling way that color is an attribute of the neural architecture of the person and NOT a property of the object we are viewing?

      See Color Constancy Illusion here:

      David Eagleman in WIRED interview https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2FMJBfn07gZ30%2F&group=world

      Beau Lotto, TED Talk https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2Fmf5otGNbkuc%2F&group=world

      Andrew Stockman, TEDx talk on how we see color: https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2F_l607r2TSwg%2F&group=world

      Science shows that color is an experience of the subject, not a property of the object: https://youtu.be/fQczp0wtZQQ but what Jay will go on to argue, is that this explanation itself is part of the COGNITIVE IMMEDIACY OF EXPERIENCE that we also take for granted.

    1. Most academics continue to insist that it is still – barely – physically possible to limit warming to no more than 1.5°C. There are strong incentives to stay behind the invisible line that separates academia from wider social and political concerns, and so to not take a clear position about this.But we need to clearly acknowledge now that warming will exceed 1.5°C because we are losing vital reaction time by entertaining fantastic scenarios. The sooner we get real about our current situation and what it demands, the better.

      Slight chance. We need nonlinear solutions and to find all the leverage points, social tipping points and idling capacity we can.:

      Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050 https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pnas.org%2Fdoi%2F10.1073%2Fpnas.1900577117&group=world

      An Introduction to PLAN E Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First-Century Era of Entangled Security and Hyperthreats https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usmcu.edu%2FOutreach%2FMarine-Corps-University-Press%2FExpeditions-with-MCUP-digital-journal%2FAn-Introduction-to-PLAN-E%2Ffbclid%2FIwAR3facE8l6Jk4Msc8C1nw8yWtwnzSCXVZGlO7JLkjqo8CWYTYAqAMTPkTO8%2F&group=world

      Science Driven Societal Transformation https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2Fz9ZCjd2rqGY%2F&group=world

    1. et me put it one thing do you think that uh uh it's there's anything wrong let's put it bluntly this way in in in in trying to take that from the 00:37:55 godzilla and and uh letting the thing letting this a bit of wisdom small bit of wisdom that i can get out of it uh influence the 00:38:07 rest but uh using it directly because i think that that's my that's what i think is my contribution somehow uh look there is in this uh 00:38:19 in this large uh aspect of midfield there is a there's a part of it which is definitely very relevant uh for modern physics that could be used for it and 00:38:30 um uh and from modern philosophy and you know the people in modern philosophy the people in cambridge the people in the us um not only garfield but 00:38:42 west of the others who who who are using uh a idea from the guardian in the philosophical context 00:38:57 i i think this is dialogue and i don't know if i don't know if anything could be useful in the other direction in a sense but it's uh you know i think culture is a dialogue it's a dialogue in which uh 00:39:09 in which uh uh we keep learning from from else whether it's a tradition whether it's a different school whether it is nature itself because we interact whether there's us talking to one another this constant exchange 00:39:24 that in my opinion makes the beauty of of of of culture but also uh but also the that's how we learn that's how we know that how we change

      Rovelli is trying to articulate that his focus is in the Wisdom aspect and not so much the Ethics / Compassion aspect of Nagarjuna's results, and that it is relevant for science and philosophy.

    1. First we have to understand that the opposites need each other, revolve around each other, actually make one complete dynamic. Form is on the left and emptiness is on the right of the chart.  Form needs emptiness and emptiness needs form. They are actually not separated but intellectually we conceive them as separate and opposite.

      Explanation of Trungpa Rinpoche's Diamond Sliver

      Form and Emptiness need each other to exist and be understood. Let's unpack this. All forms can be broken down further and further into smaller and smaller bits...in the quantum mechanical limits, into emptiness. At the micro level, it is so tiny, it is no longer recognizable as form. And all this quantum mechanical soup is what makes up all forms.

      So the above is a statement using science, one perspective, which is also a position so also incomplete.It (science) is also propositional.

    2. Dogen can be very difficult to read or understand. That’s why we often need a commentary or teacher to introduce his way of writing and the underlying teaching. I often say he’s a thirteenth century cubist. Just like Picasso or in the writing world, Gertrude Stein, he tries to show all sides of the story in one paragraph or even one sentence. That is why he repeats himself and contradicts himself all in the same paragraph. If you are looking for the “right” understanding, you become confused and lost in his prism of various interpretations or views. Dogen’s “right” understanding is that there is none.   No one point of view is “right”. According to conditions, any view can be the right view in the right circumstance. Dogen really wants to take away our solid idea of a fixed ground of reality. It is not form or emptiness. It is not both or neither. There is no one right, fixed view. That is our “clinging”.

      Dogen contradicts himself because he tries to show "all sides of the story". His teaching is a "pointing out" instruction that ANY viewpoint is simply that, perspectival knowing.

      An important question then, is this, if Dogen (and Nagarjuna) are claiming that there is no objective reality in our constructed world of concepts and language, is science being denied? Is fake news ok? Is this a position that basically accepts post modernism? No, I would say no to all of these. It's pointing out the LIMITATIONS of concepts and language. They are incomplete and always leave with a sense of wanting more. And since Post Modernism is also one point of view, it is also thrown out by Dogen and Nagarjuna. Remember, ALL points of views are points of view. Fake news is also a point of view so those who practice it can also not justify it.

      What Dogen and Nagarjuna are saying is that as soon as one enters the world of concepts and language, any concept and anything side is inherently one sided. It is inherently perspectival and situated in an inherently incomplete conceptual space.

      As Tibetan doctor/monk Barry Kerzin points out in this conversation with physicist Carlo Rovelli, there is a critical difference between "existence" and "intrinsic existence". The first is not being denied by Nagarjuna, but the second, intrinsic existence, the existence of concepts and the words that represent them, is. If these two are confused, it can lead straight to nihilism.

      https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2FsPSMTNjwHZw%2F&group=world

      This also aligns with John Vervaeke's perspectival and propositional knowing in his 4 P ways of knowing about reality: Propositional, Perspectival, Participatory and Procedural. A good explanation of Vervaeke's 4Ps is here: https://hyp.is/go?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocdrop.org%2Fvideo%2FGyx5tyFttfA%2F&group=world

    1. This course is an introduction to computational theories of human cognition. Drawing on formal models from classic and contemporary artificial intelligence, we will explore fundamental issues in human knowledge representation, inductive learning and reasoning. What are the forms that our knowledge of the world takes?

      When?

    1. so number one uh societal transformation is necessary if we're to avoid catastroph catastrophe and maintain and improve social and ecological well-being 00:18:00 that's the starting that's this that's where this whole thing starts that's something that's transformation is necessary number two uh one kind of societal transformation is is a science driven transformation 00:18:13 you know you can imagine all kinds of there could be war uh revolution could be a a type of of transformation and i'm not talking about revolution here i'm talking about a science-driven 00:18:24 evidence-based uh development of and migration to fundamentally new systems so we're talking about dinovo de novo design from scratch right this is so we're not 00:18:38 improving uh capitalism for example or represented democracy where we're looking at conceivable de novo designs that might be fit or among the most 00:18:52 fit of all possible designs number three is uh now um you know if i were a genius which which i'm not but if i were a genius and i came up with the 00:19:05 greatest plan that everyone could you know we could rearrange society according to this you know this design uh if there were no way to a practical way to implement that then i would have been wasting my time 00:19:19 so a big part of this series is actually especially paper number two is really focused on what what is a how could this actually be done in the real world how can how can you do this 00:19:32 um so i i claim at least that there is a viable and affordable uh way to go about transformation that within a reasonable span of time 00:19:44 uh and i and i when i consider 50 a 50-year program here to be a reasonable span of time transformation could spread to near global levels so um you know we're talking about a 00:19:57 concerted effort over a long period of time to reach a global scale change but that does not mean that no change happens until the 49th year it means that change happens 00:20:11 exponentially fast so maybe in the first few years there's you know there's not a lot going on but it goes exponentially fast from there and those communities local communities that participate in this 00:20:24 r d program would be obviously be the first to reap the benefits uh number four the and this is maybe one of the key world view aspects of this paper number one is all 00:20:37 about world view the proposed program views society as a cognitive organism and its societal systems as a cognitive architecture so you know that 00:20:50 if indeed society is a cognitive organism and ours and our systems are part of the cognitive architecture that already lends itself to ideas of how you might measure fitness now you're starting 00:21:02 we're starting to get an idea of what is a system supposed to do so we'll be getting more into that today number five the intrinsic purpose of a society now obviously if we're going to 00:21:17 build a new system we have to know for what is a new system supposed to do like what is an economic system supposed to do what is a governance system supposed to do what is the what is the purpose of them so uh uh 00:21:30 purpose is also a big part of the world view in the first paper and the i one of the points of the fifth point is that the intrinsic purpose of a society of societal uh cognition and thus also of societal 00:21:42 systems is to achieve and sustainably maintain social and economic ecological viability and vitality probably broadly defined now if you're listening carefully and 00:21:55 you're of the active inference persuasion you'll you'll already see active inference in here when i talk when we talk about um sustainably maintain that means and 00:22:07 anticipation of the future all right uh i also say here the cognition is largely focused on reducing the uncertainty that our intrinsic purpose will be successfully fulfilled 00:22:22 now and in the expected future so uh again we have a concept from active inference that is uncertainty um the cognitive view opens up many new opportunities for research 00:22:35 and and i feel like this view is really critical if we are to truly uh have some kind of of 00:22:46 optimally beneficial societal systems and uh number seven the last one this proposed r d program like i already mentioned it represents uh it's conceptual now but it represents a partnership 00:23:03 between local communities and the global science community um and the you know neither of those are monolithic the global science 00:23:15 community is you know it was a whatever however you might want to envision it a hundred labs or a thousand labs around the world or individual researchers or groups of researcher teams interdisciplinary teams at one 00:23:28 institution teams across institutions that is what i'm that is really who i'm speaking i'm in the in this series i'm speaking to the science world and i'm 00:23:38 suggesting or offering or or you know hoping that the science community might find this perspective interesting and see the the benefits that would be the 00:23:53 scientific benefits that would come of this the the research gains that would come of this the possibilities that would come of this and and and get engaged right so it's kind of a 00:24:06 like i'm asking the science community to get engaged in this problem in it and in a particular kind of way and in what some people have called a second to you know whatever the phrase escapes me 00:24:19 in the moment so i forget what the uh what is the title their second second i'm gonna just call it second order science but i think there's a slightly different phrase very interesting i remember reading this 00:24:36 second order yeah yeah second order science

      The seven main thrusts: 1. societal transformation - necessary to avoid catastrophe 2. the specific type of transformation is science-based transformation based on entirely new systems - de novo 3. A practical way to implement the transformation in the real world - it must be economical, and doable within the short time window for system change before us. Considering a time period of 50 years for total change, with some types of change at a much higher priority than others.Those communities that are the first to participate would make the most rapid improvements. 4. Promoting a worldview of society as a social superorganism, a cognitive organism, and its societal systems as a cognitive architecture. 5. Knowing the intrinsic purpose of a society - each subsystem must be explained in terms of the overall intrinsic purpose. 6. The reason for transformation - Transformation that improves cognition reduces the uncertainty that our society's intrinsic purpose is fulfilled. 7. Forming a partnership between the global science community and the communities of the world.

    2. what is second order science and i'm sure we're gonna again go into it in this like fractal convo but and how does everyone play a role in it right so 00:24:50 so traditional science would be first order science is the the scientist is removed from the experiment that is an observer to the experiment 00:25:03 maybe the scientist sets up the experiment but then steps back and watches the you know the results unfold and it just observes the results and then you know does the statistics or whatever on the results and 00:25:16 then records the the uh the knowledge gain the aim of that is to build knowledge and you know that's wonderful and fantastic and terribly useful and 00:25:29 important and that is mostly what science has done over the you know over the last few hundred years or so uh second order science is a little bit different it is 00:25:41 the science i would say that is really appropriate for for today for our problems today in second order science the the aim is to change 00:25:52 you know change the system change the it's more about unfoldment of an experiment rather than getting to the end a certain goal of an experiment the scientist is part of the experiment 00:26:05 it's reflective in nature it's intrinsically reflective and it and it really represents a partnership between the science world and and the stakeholders so it's a little bit more like 00:26:18 engineering in a sense as more of a flavor of engineering in that there's a group of stakeholders who want some you know want something to happen and uh the science world is engaged in 00:26:31 building that but it's part it's like a you know series of learning together and reflecting on what is important and what is of value 00:26:42 so it's very much value driven which which is unlike first order science it's not particularly value driven so the the the aim is to change and it's value driven and the science scientists are part of 00:26:55 the experiment really interesting that reminds me of of um working uh for the first time really closely with someone outside of academia and then their insistence to include stakeholders in the conversation very 00:27:11 early and that was something that i didn't see as a practice around me in academia so i didn't see it as an affordance i didn't see it as an opportunity in my projects and then when i kind of 00:27:22 was like well i could contact anyone early on potentially and maybe even include them in the project that's um then you realize how closely clustered 00:27:33 all not available have been organized and so it's really interesting and uh and as you pointed out like there still 00:27:52 is a role for the first order of science because it's sometimes you need to make the measurement like first order cybernetics the thermometer we need to keep the temperature range second order is it the 00:28:04 right thermometer you know third order should we even be tracking a thermometer there's a space right for all right what is what do we really want what do w what do we really value yeah and and maybe i should just inject here too that 00:28:17 um that you know it if if the science world is going to be involved in in a value question it 00:28:28 really just has to be like transparent out front like this is what we're doing as opposed to more uh you know obtuse we're actually making value statements 00:28:43 but we're sort of hiding them in first order science language you know so it just has to be transparent this is what we're doing this is what it's about we're we're learning together we're evolving solutions to 00:28:56 real problems that's that humanity has and uh everything is like transparent and clear and above board and if it's done that way then it's i think could be extremely useful and it's 00:29:11 is just what the world needs actually because there are serious serious as we'll talk about you know like overwhelmingly serious problems that we face i don't know how or if we can solve them 00:29:24 and if we're not engaging you know the scientific world some of the brightest minds on the planet if we're not engaging them then you know we're we're not going to get the kind of solutions that might be 00:29:36 you know i mean we're better off engaging the science world in these questions along with communities right because that yep i i was talking to you no no no it's fun that's fine this okay 00:29:50 yeah yeah okay just one short on that is it's actually a really respectful way for science to approach this question of like we'll be ready as scientists or as systems thinkers 00:30:01 or as modelers will come to the table of policy and value discussion when we have a transparent model that's actually going to be adding value rather than potentially 00:30:12 being a vector for some non-transparent force to have undue influence on discussions that really matter so it's it's um i hope this conversation helps people 00:30:24 rethink how science could be involved in these policy discussions because those are going to be the exact terms that we're going to be talking through so right right and when we talk about the second paper we'll get more 00:30:37 we'll talk a little bit more about uh second order science and its role and there's citations there for anyone that's that's interested

      "Second Order" science will be a critical kind of science to practice in this project. In this kind of science, the scientist is part of the experiment itself. It is value driven, in contrast to first order science.

    3. so obviously the word transformation is in the title of the 00:10:54 series so this you know the general topic is societal transformation and although that term alone is a little bit you know people have different ideas of what societal transformation means so i 00:11:07 want to make a few things clear i especially in the second paper i make the distinction between reform and trends and transformation 00:11:19 and by reform i mean anything that would you know improve our government system and prove our our economic system improve our legal system you know 00:11:33 one example might be uh levying taxes on the wealthy or something and then you know using those fees to to provide medical services or something 00:11:45 or altering how long a representative can be in and you know in congress in the legislature or something like that or ways to vote or things like that those really 00:11:59 those are all what i would consider reforms and i'm interested in a different question i'm interested in the question out of all conceivable ways to organize the societal systems and by 00:12:11 societal systems i really focus on a few of them uh governance systems economic systems uh legal systems educational systems and i think maybe one or two others out of 00:12:24 out of that i i view those systems as the cognitive architecture of a society that is that's how society thinks through 00:12:35 those systems it it learns it adapts it decides and and evolves kind of through that kind of cognitive architecture and my question 00:12:49 is out of all possible conceivable ways out of all con for example out of all conceivable economic systems what ones might be best for 00:13:01 uh for demonstratively showing that that they're you know they excel at in improving or maintaining um social environmental well-being 00:13:13 so so even that even there we have uh the concept of a fitness coming into this that is what out of all conceivable systems which are the most fit for purpose and now now 00:13:26 soon we can talk about what purpose might be but you know that that is a new question that's that is a question that's hardly been asked in the in the history and i think maybe um it's only now 00:13:38 that science has the tools and the theoretical understandings that maybe it's maybe this is right maybe maybe it is time that we can talk about the purpose of a society and 00:13:50 how fit a given system design might be

      John distinguishes between reform and transformation. In the simplest terms, reform deals with changes to an existing paradigm whilst transformation deals with fundamental structural changes of an existing paradigm - a paradigm shift.

      John views society as a social superorganism (SSO) and the major systems such as legal, economic, social, governance, education, etc as cognitive architectures of the SSO. The theoretical question being asked is: Of all possible variations, which one has the best fitness to the function of a society?

    4. we're going to talk in this series 00:01:10 about a series of papers that i just published in the in the journal sustainability that that series is titled science driven societal transformation

      Title: Science-driven Societal Transformation, Part 1, 2 and 3 John Boik, Oregon State University John's Website: https://principledsocietiesproject.org/

      Intro: A society can be viewed as a superorganism that expresses an intrinsic purpose of achieving and maintaining vitality. The systems of a society can be viewed as a societal cognitive architecture. The goal of the R&D program is to develop new, integrated systems that better facilitate societal cognition (i.e., learning, decision making, and adaptation). Our major unsolved problems, like climate change and biodiversity loss, can be viewed as symptoms of dysfunctional or maladaptive societal cognition. To better solve these problems, and to flourish far into the future, we can implement systems that are designed from the ground up to facilitate healthy societal cognition.

      The proposed R&D project represents a partnership between the global science community, interested local communities, and other interested parties. In concept, new systems are field tested and implemented in local communities via a special kind of civic club. Participation in a club is voluntary, and only a small number of individuals (roughly, 1,000) is needed to start a club. No legislative approval is required in most democratic nations. Clubs are designed to grow in size and replicate to new locations exponentially fast. The R&D project is conceptual and not yet funded. If it moves forward, transformation on a near-global scale could occur within a reasonable length of time. The R&D program spans a 50 year period, and early adopting communities could see benefits relatively fast.

  5. Jun 2022
    1. But systems of schooling and educational institutions–and much of online learning– are organized in ways that deny their voices matter. My role is to resist those systems and structures to reclaim the spaces of teaching and learning as voice affirming. Voice amplifying.

      Modeling annotation and note taking can allow students to see that their voices matter in conversation with the "greats" of knowledge. We can and should question authority. Even if one's internal voice questions as one reads, that might be enough, but modeling active reading and note taking can better underline and empower these modes of thought.

      There are certainly currents within American culture that we can and should question authority.

      Sadly some parts of conservative American culture are reverting back to paternalized power structures of "do as I say and not as I do" which leads to hypocrisy and erosion of society.

      Education can be used as a means of overcoming this, though it requires preventing the conservative right from eroding this away from the inside by removing books and certain thought from the education process that prevents this. Extreme examples of this are Warren Jeff's control of religion, education, and social life within his Mormon sect.

      Link to: - Lawrence Principe examples of the power establishment in Western classical education being questioned. Aristotle wasn't always right. The entire history of Western science is about questioning the status quo. (How can we center this practice not only in science, but within the humanities?)


      My evolving definition of active reading now explicitly includes the ideas of annotating the text, having a direct written conversation with it, questioning it, and expanding upon it. I'm not sure I may have included some or all of these in it before. This is what "reading with a pen in hand" (or digital annotation tool) should entail. What other pieces am I missing here which might also be included?

    1. One of my frustrations with the “science of learning” is that to design experiments which have reasonable limits on the variables and can be quantitatively measured results in scenarios that seem divorced from the actual experience of learning.

      Is the sample size of learning experiments really large enough to account for the differences in potential neurodiversity?

      How well do these do for simple lectures which don't add mnemonic design of some sort? How to peel back the subtle differences in presentation, dynamism, design of material, in contrast to neurodiversities?

      What are the list of known differences? How well have they been studied across presenters and modalities?

      What about methods which require active modality shifts versus the simple watch and regurgitate model mentioned in watching videos. Do people do actively better if they're forced to take notes that cause modality shifts and sensemaking?

    1. Open Science

      Open science and citizen science are complementary, for citizen science openness has to be even more discussed for the benefits of participants

    1. Encyclopedia of Library and Information ScienceVolume 29 - Stanford University Libraries to System AnalysisBy Allen Kent, Harold Lancour, Jay E. Daily

      Contains significant section on SYNTOL.

  6. May 2022
    1. Like all plants, the bulrush requires oxygen to produce energy. One solution is obvious: Send shoots skyward like straws to suck down oxygen to the roots.

      Plants don't require oxygen to produce energy (photosynthesis), they require CO2.

      https://www.lexico.com/definition/photosynthesis

      Oxygen is generated as a byproduct of this, not a requirement.

  7. www.biorxiv.org