![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 38 to 62 of 66. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on February 18, 2005, at 0:23:41
In reply to Re: I:A/M, posted by alexandra_k on February 18, 2005, at 0:18:07
Our posts are the skeletons upon which future posters build?????
Posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 2:38:04
In reply to Re: exclusion=bad, posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2005, at 20:36:02
Posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 8:51:11
In reply to Re: I:A/M » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on February 18, 2005, at 0:13:10
I might not be saying it quite the way Dinah means it, but to me a coral colony:
1) is made up of individual living things - no two quite alike
2) the individual can not live without the colony
3) the colony can not live without the individuals
We are all individuals with our own virtues, faults and personalities. No two alike.
On many levels we depend on the babble colony to live. The feedback, the support, the humor, the seriousness. Even supporting other people fulfills a need in us. Babble provides *all* of us with *something* we are lacking elsewhere.
But without us, the babble colony wouldn't live either.
---------------
It is a whole, made up of the sum of the parts. It is not just an internet service that can be reproduced at any time. And it isn't a service like a restaraunt where people (customers) are interchangable.
Posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 9:12:53
In reply to Re: Coral colony » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 8:51:11
It's a beautiful metaphor, Mel, and I am in full agreement with its sentiment, but couldn't a proponent of separate sub-colonies say that some individuals like the bottom of the reef, some swim freely on the surface, and others prefer to hide in caves?
Toph
Posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 10:14:03
In reply to Re: Coral colony » AuntieMel, posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 9:12:53
I can't take credit for the metaphor - it's Dinah's and I was only trying to explain it as I understood it. I could easily be completely wrong.
--------------- start of humor ------------------------
a proponant of separate sub-colonies can say whatever he wants, right? but I haven't seen any swimming coral.....
--------------- end of humor ------------------------
Yes, individuals can prefer different things. That is the beauty of individuality, after all. The only question here is the structure of babble, and if babble would retain its wonderful uniqueness if that part of it changed.
Take the park metaphor that came up before. I see a park as a place that is open to all and people come and go at will. Some might meet and go off together as a group, but nobody cares because they remain mostly anonymous.
I don't think of babble that way.
I think of babble as a private club, but one that has only membership requirement: mutual respect. Anyone can join, and some might naturally form bonds that they don't form with the rest of the club, but everyone is welcome to join in the activities - as long as they maintain that mutual respect.
But again, those are my views. Others are free to have differing ones.
Posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 11:16:35
In reply to Re: Coral colony » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 8:51:11
Maybe PC is right. :)
Yes, that's pretty much what I mean. I'm still a bit stymied in how to express it further, because it's something I feel and see, and I don't have enough words for it.
But it's got something to do with Babble being formed by the posters who came before, whether they're still posting here or not, the posters who are here now, and the posters yet to post. And that you can't see Babble as (at a loss for words here) without taking into account (at a loss for words here too). And that the environment has to be kept right for the individual organisms to form the beauty of the coral reef. And that you might see the beauty but you miss a good part of the wonder if you don't see the individual organisms make up the whole.
And that when Dr. Bob sees Babble in terms of massification and bipolar urges or whatever it was that he was pointing us to, he's not only missing the wonder, but he's also missing the ... (again at a loss for words - but it's probably something along the lines of how people viewed coral reefs before it became known just what a coral reef was).
Which again, I don't mean as a comment on Dr. Bob relating to individuals. It's meant as a comment on Dr. Bob relating to Babble. But I'm at a loss for words there too.
Darn words. Totally inadequate.
Posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 11:18:33
In reply to Re: Coral colony » AuntieMel, posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 9:12:53
My metaphor extended only as far as the coral itself. :)
We'll have to figure out who the fish represent. Researchers?
Posted by partlycloudy on February 18, 2005, at 11:42:55
In reply to Re: Coral colony » Toph, posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 11:18:33
It took a while for me to realize this thread wasn't about Australia. So I'm a slow growing coral :)
So if we think about Babble as a coral reef, there are all the collaborative elements that keep the colony thriving and growing. And when we run out of room, we evolve, or branch out, or stop, whither, and die.
And I would further elaborate on the coral colony as the life form itself, and not the creatures who live amongst the corals. Because then you'd be getting into bottom feeders, predators, and all the other nasties that we try to keep Babble safe from.
This is a strange aside, but I have often thought that when I die, I want my ashes to be incorporated into an artificial reef - something they are doing now in Florida on the Gulf of Mexico side. I think you get mixed in with a bunch of concrete and make you into a geodesic dome thingy that creates an artificial reef for critters to live in and on.
Posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 12:03:07
In reply to Re: Coral colony » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 10:14:03
>
> --------------- start of humor ------------------------
>
> a proponant of separate sub-colonies can say whatever he wants, right? but I haven't seen any swimming coral.....
>Boy could my aunt Coral swim! Actually, I mistakenly thought there was a symbiotic (is that the right word or co-dependent?) relationship between coral and fish, like some parasites and their hosts. So I guess in your model researchers would be parasites.
Toph
Posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 12:06:40
In reply to Re: Coral colony, posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 12:03:07
Well, I would of course never say so. :)
Posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 12:07:18
In reply to Re: Coral colony, posted by Toph on February 18, 2005, at 12:03:07
And of course, it is symbiotic. :)
Posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 12:08:34
In reply to Re: Coral colony » Dinah, posted by partlycloudy on February 18, 2005, at 11:42:55
Neat idea! I like putting the ashes at the bottom of a newly planted tree as well.
Posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 14:27:12
In reply to Re: Coral colony » AuntieMel, posted by Dinah on February 18, 2005, at 11:16:35
Right, it's been evolving, the beginning becoming the present which will become the future. Prior posters have affected others, who affect us who will affect those who come.
It's immortality, in a way.
It's unique, and not to be explained by science.
But for the scientifically minded: think of sitting back and watching a screen saver of fractals. All of the pieces are similar in shape to the others, though not exactly, and the colors vary. And in the screen saver they change sizes and groupings and colors and they undulate and and the whole changes shape ..... I think you get my drift.
Watching it evolve and change evokes in you a childlike feeling of awe. But if you were to examine it too closely it would become just a bunch of similar shapes. The magic would be gone.
So I think (correct me if I'm wrong, please) Dinah is trying to say if babble is looked at too disinterestedly - in terms of group dynamics, virtual large groups or whatever - you miss the magic.
Posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 15:32:51
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals » Dinah, posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 14:27:12
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 1:56:56
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals » Dinah, posted by AuntieMel on February 18, 2005, at 14:27:12
I think I understand this.
> The only question here is the structure of babble, and if babble would retain its wonderful uniqueness if that part of it changed.Babble is unique just the way it is. But it could also change and still be unique. I guess that the issue may be that some people seem happy with things just the way they are while Dr Bob has improvements in mind.
>Watching it evolve and change evokes in you a childlike feeling of awe. But if you were to examine it too closely it would become just a bunch of similar shapes. The magic would be gone.
But I think awe can be found in viewing it the other way too. Mathemeticians, for example (and maybe even physicists) do a lot of work with fractals. Analysing them and plotting their course and trying to use this to predict the behaviour of water or something (please don’t quote me on that to anybody who knows). But I bet that these people also feel the awe. It is the awe that inspires them to spend so much of their lives trying to understand them and figure them out.
Likewise with the study of the mind. Some people think that you shouldn’t try to study the mind (or soul if you like) with science because there is a wonderful mystery there and we can just wonder at it. But some people use their sense of wonder to discover still more wonders. Likewise with the study of life. The study of reproduction.
Likewise with the study of group dynamics or Babble.
To see it as a process group isn’t to make it any the less wonderful.
Just like with history. Is looking at patterns that recur over the course of history disrespectful to the individuals or is it a good way of helping future undividuals? Is looking at patterns that recur over Babble history disrespectful to the posters or is it a good way of helping future posters?
Don’t we want to have an optimal structure for symbiosis?????
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 1:59:21
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 1:56:56
symbiosis???
a symbiotic relationship??Ugh. Words can be hard.
Posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 8:34:56
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 1:56:56
Could you not refer to it as "improvements"?
Posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 8:35:51
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 1:56:56
And I'm not sure you do. But that's ok.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 15:06:09
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 8:34:56
> Could you not refer to it as "improvements"?
???
But nothing is perfect.
It might not turn out to be a good move, but there is only one way to find out.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 15:08:15
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 8:35:51
> And I'm not sure you do. But that's ok.
You are not sure I understand???
I shall try to post something to convey understanding sometime today (maybe tomorrow morning for you guys), okay?????
And of course you can always correct me :-)
Posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 19:44:35
In reply to Re: Coral colony and fractals » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 15:08:15
It was just a passing fancy, not worth wasting brain power on.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 20:55:13
In reply to It truly isn't worth the bother » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 19:44:35
I don't know what to say without turning it into an essay. Something I was trying hard to avoid (I am so behind with work at the moment it really is quite frightening).
I think I do understand.
But I still don't see what is wrong with seeing it as a process group SOMETIMES.
And I still think you need a comparatively objective vantage point (to look at it abstractly) SOMETIMES. Especially when trying to work out what is best.I do think it comes down to liking things the way they are versus looking at it fairly abstractly and trying to work out the optimum structure for future growth.
I agree with everything you (and others) have said about the 'coral colony' vantage point.
But I think the other one is equally important.I dunno.
I dunno what else to say.
But I do think it is worth understanding.
Perhaps we are just talking past each other again.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 21:10:34
In reply to Re: stoppit. » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 20:55:13
Posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 21:14:44
In reply to Re: dare I say round and round? (nm), posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 21:10:34
a couple of times
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2005, at 21:19:50
In reply to well, i asked to get off, posted by Dinah on February 19, 2005, at 21:14:44
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.