Well, I think rather than belabour this, I think the point is that we can see simple opposites are not enough, which has really been obvious to everybody for a very long time... this group, neutrosophy, stresses the importance of the fuzzy middle ground in a dialectics inspired fashion (although it is no longer dialectics). Their meta-level is dynamics/chaos. The paper John posted is a fairly easy read.
On 11/1/15, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > From my brief reading about thesis, antithesis and synthesis and my > sense of where Kant would have been coming from, this was all about > working from a thesis and its negation toward developing a better > thesis about the subject. So the evaluation of fuzzy logic, while it > might play a role in this process, would not be the goal. > Jim Bromer > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> wrote: >> I remember reading Kant and he did use the basic >> thesis-antithesis-synthesis in the Critique of Pure Reason. Hegel >> picked up that theme and made it the fundamental scheme of his >> ontology. The official accounts of Hegel by scholars are one thing, >> but remember reading Hegel is another thing. The Science of Logic is >> a book of extreme obscurity and subject to interpretation of wide >> degrees. I spent two long years on it, about 2 hours every day. >> Hegel basically starts out with fairly simple opposites, but he >> advances in a series of brutally obfuscating steps to the increasingly >> mind-dependent, and he does certainly venture into the middle ground. >> His "illusory being" is a mind-dependent "nullity" -- he is basically >> saying as far as I can determine that we may hold some determinate >> value for something, but we also hold its other, opposite, and also >> all values that it COULD be. Remember, again, that it is more or less >> impossible to give a definite account of what the f he really meant... >> Mike A >> >> On 11/1/15, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Jim Bromer [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> >>>> Wikipedia says, "Hegel used the "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" idea only >>>> once, and >>>> he attributed the terminology to Immanuel Kant. The terminology was >>>> largely >>>> developed by Johann Gottlieb Fichte, also an advocate of the philosophy >>>> identified as German idealism. Although Hegel rejected the Fichtean >>>> schema, it is >>>> at least arguable that his dialectic can be described in Fichtean >>>> terms." >>>> The thesis-antithesis idea is referred to in a Stanford Encyclopedia of >>>> Philosophy >>>> article about Kant. >>>> Jim Bromer >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for setting us straight on that Jim. >>> >>> So then we might rather say Hegelians use Being, Nothing, then Becoming >>> whereas Neutrosophians(?) use Being, Nothing, NeutroBeing then >>> NeutroBecoming. >>> >>> Or would it be NeutroNothing verses NeutroBeing. Either I guess. >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> AGI >>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>> RSS Feed: >>> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae >>> Modify Your Subscription: >>> https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >>> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> AGI >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> RSS Feed: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-653794b5 >> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
