Skip to content
Permalink
Browse files

updated about

  • Loading branch information...
Oblivia Simplex
Oblivia Simplex committed Mar 15, 2019
1 parent 6bf4dfb commit 6cfbb8b099ca380fbf9484d5424be74fe275d3f3
Showing with 59 additions and 12 deletions.
  1. +5 −4 info/about.md
  2. +46 −6 posts/modularity_in_philosophy.md
  3. +1 −0 posts/parasitic_disengagement.md
  4. +1 −1 posts/urschleim.md
  5. +6 −1 toc.data
@@ -1,9 +1,10 @@
# About All This

**Feral Machines**, a blog that stumbles erratically between computer science,
philosophy, and utter confabulation, and **P'log**, a blogging server, implemented
in Prolog, are both written and maintained by Lucca Fraser, who lives in Halifax,
Nova Scotia.
[Feral Machines](http://feralmachin.es), a blog that stumbles erratically
between computer science, philosophy, and utter confabulation, and
[P'log](https://github.com/oblivia-simplex/plog), a
blogging server, implemented in Prolog, are both written and maintained by Lucca
Fraser, who lives in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

You can reach her by email, and, if you like, submit comments to the blog,
at (sorry for the awful formatting; I'm trying to fool the spambots):
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
# Hegel is Unmaintainable
# Your Rhizome is Unmaintainable

Over a series of emails, my friend Patrick McHugh made a few suggestions about
modularity in philosophy, which I've found myself thinking about every now and
@@ -17,8 +17,48 @@ then:
> incorporability of unanticipated data. What any of these basic things would be,
> I do not know, apart from perhaps being some kind of grammar of relationality.
This is something that I don't think I fully appreciated back when I was working
primarily in philosophy. I think that, in hindsight, I took for granted that
"systematicity" required a monolithic, or "holistic", unity -- that having each
concept in a system draw its significance from each other was not a liability
but a sign of philosophical coherence.
It's an idea that will seem intuitively sensible to anyone working in software
engineering, I think. A system that stands or falls as a monolithic whole will,
under most circumstances, fall. There's a brittleness in holistic unity --
subjecting any _part_ of such a system to revision will frequently entail major
or minor revisions in every other component.

## Epistemic Consequences of Monolithic Systematicity

## Social Consequences of Monolithic Systematicity

Monolithic unity has sociological consequences for the propagation of a philosophical
system as well. It encourages a certain priestliness in its carriers. The sheer
bulk and holistic complexity of the system means that its contributions cannot be
transmitted piecemeal. The student must _immerse_ themselves within the system,
and learn it like they would a language. The difference between those who
_understand_ the system, and those who don't, can't easily be communicated through
discrete arguments, and there's an increased tendency to rely upon appeals to
the authority of the system's priesthood.

A certain degree of epistemic conservativism is to be expected as well, among
the priesthood of monolithic systems. If every component of the system is
strongly reliant of every other component, then revision is costly, and in
an effort to ensure only
[minimal mutilation](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-underdetermination/)
to the system, there may arise a temptation to
[disengage](/posts/parasitic_disengagement.md#angels)
from external epistemic challenges.

## A Monolith is Not Arborescent

-- reread the intro to Thousand Plateaus. it would be interesting, and fun, to
use that as a foil

## Systems as Directed Graphs


### A Monolith is Strongly Connected

## Modularization is not Fragmentation

## Modularity in Software

## Modularity in Evolving Structures

<a href="mailto:lucca.fraser@gmail.com">Test mailto!</a>
@@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ to dominate the evolutionary process. Adaptation has stopped, and any
"intelligence" that the system might have exhibited gives way to a kind of
free-floating delirium.

<a name="angels"></a>

## The Discourse of Angels

@@ -906,7 +906,7 @@ principle, any God's-eye-view from which we could survey the space of general
computation, and detect any leaks or misspecifications in advance. (Whether a
"Halting Oracle" could, indeed, provide the foundation for such a vantage point,
I'm unsure -- it certainly shouldn't be taken for granted that it would -- but
its impossibility _certainly_ implies that of the even more godlike "Rice
its impossibility _certainly_ implies that of an even more godlike "Rice
Oracle", that would be able to tell us for any program p and property P, whether
or not P(p).) The proliferation of bugs and leaks is, itself, a contingent
matter -- nothing _demands_ that it take place -- but there is no silver bullet
@@ -75,6 +75,11 @@
with much yeggogological meandering.'),
date('2019-03-09'),
tags([weird_machines, genetic_programming, ontology,
the_last_instance, conflated_automatons, roper])]
the_last_instance, conflated_automatons, roper])],

[file('modularity_in_philosophy.md'),
title('Modularity in Philosophy'),
abstract(''),
tags([draft, philosophy, computer_science])]

].

0 comments on commit 6cfbb8b

Please sign in to comment.
You can’t perform that action at this time.