Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from February, 2015

anti-résumé, 2015

(Not a portrait of me by Frederic Leighton.)
Name: Not Clive James, Not Robin Hanson
Age: Missed most of the Twentieth Century
Address: Almost nowhere, really.

Nationality: Not a great deal. I don't participate in Scottish culture any more than I have to by merit of enculturation.

Languages: I can't speak Gaelic, Spanish, Cornish, Saxon, nor many many others...


Non-interests: Sport, war, conlangs, Tarski, collecting anything, scale-modelling, Dr Who, surfing, bell-ringing, spelunking.

Education lapses:
At Secondary level:
No economics, no philosophy, no gender, no business studies, no psychology, no politics, no French, no Chinese, no grammar (properly). I'm also quite bad at geography.

Tertiary: No law, no anthropology, no engineering, no geology, no medicals, no German philosophy to speak of.

Code: I don't know any functional languages (unless you count the pariah JavaScript). I've never used a static code analyser, or rigorous optimisation without one. I have never prov…

oh god the data miscellany

(c) Occupy the Amendment (2014), Jeff Hemsley


The reason to use quantitative methods wherever possible* is not that numbers are generally better representations — they're not, for psychological or social or art phenomena — but because of what they do to your method: first, they minimise the space that our raging biases get to act in; and, more, because they force the enquirer to think clearly about the Thing.

("What about this Thing can be counted?" implies the prior questions "What are the distinct features of the Thing?" and "From which of its features arise which features?")


* And they are possibly always possible.

****************************************************************************************

The quantitative omits most of the lived world; the qualitative includes all of its bullshit. (The former is leashed to one rich dimension, numbers; the latter is leashed to an insensitive kludge, human perception and language.)


****************…

Table of Conceptual conversions

in converting between maths, metaphysics, and object-oriented code:



in
Metaphysics

in
Maths ^ in
Codeas
Heuristicor
elseType *Set **ClassApplesA description,
sufficiently generalised to
fit every member of a set.TokenElementObjectAn appleAn instance that satisfies
that description.SubtypeSubsetSubclassGranny
Smiths
A more specialised
description, covering
only some of the first set.Complex ideaFamilyInner classApple with a teratoma?A set which includes another set as member.RelationRelationAssociatione.g. Between an
apple and Newton's
lying mouth
.Logical connection of
any sort.EssenceConditionInterface implementorApples implement
seeds.Sine qua non?Domain and
codomainType?.Spec of valid input and output values.Noumenon?ModelDer Apfel-an-Sich.The entities as they
are themselves, beyond
our view. (Sometimes
primary properties though.)'Structure'FORMControllerEh.The formal shape and relations
of a system - what the noumenal and
phenomenal share.PhenomenonParticular expression?ViewThe cuticle?
No…