>> I am dismayed at the response of some very vocal members who use this
>> as an opportunity to try to promote their own ideas
>
>This is *supposed* to be a dialogue of our own views. We don't want
>mere reports of others views (unless internalised as our own) -
>however important the sources.
As List Maintainer and PCP Editor, I assert that this is *supposed* to be a
dialog whereby DIFFERENT views are argued in order to MOVE TOWARDS
CONSENSUS on the core issues of systems science and cybernetics. Clearly at
least the SUBJECT MATTER considered by Rosen, Kampis, etc., if not their
views themselves, is in the core of SS/Cyb.
Furthermore, my opinion, based on a PARTIAL study of Rosen, is that,
if/when they are properly understood, the views of Rosen will be VERY
COHERENT with the "world-view" presented by SS/Cyb. I think Don is coming
to this opinion as well, given his favorable reaction to Ashby's "Intro. to
Cybernetics". That book is the closest thing we have to a Universal Text.
That said, I agree with Edmonds that an open, public argument (meaning a
back and forth on specifics without appeal to authority) is the WAY we
should go about this.
O---------------------------------------------------------------------------->
| Cliff Joslyn, NRC Research Associate, Cybernetician at Large
| Mail Code 522.3, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771 USA
| joslyn@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/joslyn 301-286-5773
V All the world is biscuit-shaped. . .