|
|
Re: Patriarchy: Re: What Matriarchy?
Len Piotrowski (lpiotrow@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:04:42 GMT
In article <3211F759.3B6@megafauna.com> Stephen Barnard <steve@megafauna.com> writes:
>[snip]
>While I too think this invocation of chaos theory is questionable, to say the
>least, there have been some reasonable proposals that chaotic behavior is seen
>in the human body. Sometimes it's pathological, such as heart fibrillations,
>which do seem to be well modeled as stable periodic systems making a
>transition into chaos.
I would at least concede that Chaos Theory might potentially serve as
explanation for chaotic processes, or transitions to these processes. However,
meaningful human contexts are not normally considered chaotic or transcendent
to the chaotic, but quite the contrary. This is true even despite the fact of
one's initial shock at encountering the strangeness of the cultural Other.
>Sometimes it's useful, such as the suggestion that
>sensory systems in the brain use chaotic atttractors to sample a large phase
>space of possibilities. I think this is pretty speculative, but someone at
>Berkeley, whose name I can't recall, has been making a case for it.
Would be interesting at a low level of brain/neural network structuring, but
would also appear to me to stress even neural models to employ it as a means
of accounting for purposeful, meaningful, directed, and coordinated (social)
action. Maybe someone can make the convincing case?!
Cheers,
--Lenny__
|