LZ:
>
>
> Colin Hales wrote:
>

>
>>The underlying structure unifies the whole
>> system. Of course you'll get some impact via the causality of the
structure....via the deep structure right down into the very fabric of
space.
>> In a very real way the existence of 'mysterious observer dependence' is
actually proof that the hierarchically organised S(.) structure idea
must be
>> somewhere near the answer.
>
> Not really. You can have a two-way causal interdependene between two
systems without them both having th esame structure.

I think you are assuming a separateness of structure that does not exist.
There is one and one only structure. We are all part of it. There is no
concept of 'separate' to be had. Absolutely everything is included in the
structure. No exceptions. Space, atoms, scientists, qualia. All
interactions at all 'scales' (scale itself) are all interactions between
different parts of the one structure. To interact at all is to interact
with another part of the structure. The idea of there being anything else
('not' the structure) is meaningless. If there is any 'thing' in the
structure then the balance of the structure expressed a perfect un-thing.
There is nothing else. That is the coincept I am exploring.

>
>> Note that we don't actually have to know what S(.) is to make a whole pile
>> of observations of properties of organisations of it that apply regardless
>> of the particular S(.). It may be we never actually get to sort out the
specifics of S(.)! (I have an idea, but it doesn't matter from the
point
>> of
>> view of understanding qualia as another property of the structure like
atoms).
>
>> In Bruno's terms the structure of S(.) is what he calls 'objective
reality'.
>> I would say that in science the first person view has primacy.
>
> Epistemic or Ontic ?

These are just words invented by members of the structure. But I'll try.
The structure delivers qualia in the first person. Those qualia are quite
valid 'things' (virtual matter)..organisation/behaviour of structure.
Their presentation bestows intrinsic knowledge as a measurement to the
embedded structure member called the scientist. This is knowledge as
intrinsic intentionality. Within the experiences is regularity which can
then be characterised as knowledge attributed to some identified behaviour
in the structure. This attribution is only an attribution as to behaviour
of the structure, not the structure. These attributions can be used by a
another  scientist in their 'first person' world.

All of this is derived from a first person presentation of a measurement.
Ergo science is entirely first operson based. Epistemic and Ontic
characters are smatter throughout this description. I could label them all
but you already know and the process adds nothing to the message or to
sorting out how it all works.

>
>>  I'd say that
>> we formulate abstractions that correlate with agreed appearances within
the
>> first person view. However, the correspo0ndence between the underlying
structure and the formulate abstractions is only that - a correlation.
Our
>> models are not the structure.
>
> *Could* they be the structure ? if it necessarily
> the case that the "structure" cannot be modelled, then
> it is perhaps no strcuture at all.
>

Which is the simpler and more reasonable basis upon which to explore the
universe:

1) The universe is literally constructed by some sort of
'empirical_law_in_ a_certain_context embodiment machine' by means unknown
that has appearances that cannot be predicted by empirical laws.
(logically equivalent to "the laws of nature are invoked by the purple
baloon people of the horsehead nebula")

or

2) The universe is a structure of which we are a part and which also has
the property of delivering appearances of itself to us within which is
regularity that can be captured mathematically.

>
>> Yes....all these things rely on perceptual mechanisms which will
never...repeat...never...be found in quantum mechanics....nor any other
depiction of appearances.
>
> Why not ?


out of time!!!

colin



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to