Re: Leibniz's theodicy: a nonlocal and hopefully best mereology

```Wiki:  Mereology has been axiomatized in various ways as applications
of predicate
logic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_logic> to formal
ontology<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_ontology>,
of which mereology is an important part. A common element of such
axiomatizations is the assumption, shared with inclusion, that the
part-whole relation orders <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_order>its
universe, meaning that everything is a part of itself
(reflexivity<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexive_relation>),
that a part of a part of a whole is itself a part of that whole (
transitivity <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitive_relation>),```
```
Richard: These assumptions apply to the Indra Pearl's of Chinese Buddhism
and to Liebniz's monads. And more importantly superstring theory requires
that tiny balls of  6-dmensional space exist which turn out to have the
properties of reflexivity and transitivity, and therefore are candidates to

Wiki: and that two distinct entities cannot each be a part of the other (
antisymmetry <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisymmetric_relation>).

Richard: It seems that neither the pearls, or monads, and certainly not the
CYMs have this property. So its strickly not mereology that applies to

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Roger <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote:

>  Hi Stephen P. King
>
> Mereology is part and parcel of Leibniz's system, to use a limp pun.
>
> 1) Although unproven, but because God is good while the world is
> contingent (imperfect, misfitting),
> Leibniz, like Augustine and Paul, believed that things as a whole work for
> good, but unfortunately not all parts
> have to be equally good. This is essentially his theodicy.
>
> 2).  Everything is nonlocal: The monads are arranged like a tree structure
> the Supreme Monad, above which is God, causing all things to happen
> and perceiving all things.
>
> Now Man, being near the top of the Great Chain of Being, and the
> "perceptions" of each monad are being constantly and instantly
> updated to reflect the perceptions all of the other monads in the universe,
> So, to the degree of their logical distance from one another,
> their intelligence, and  clarity of vision,  each monad is
> omniscient. Personally  I use the analogy of the holograph,
> each part contining the whole, but wqith limited resolution.
>
>
>
> Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
> 8/20/2012
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so
> everything could function."
>
> ----- Receiving the following content -----
> *From:* Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>
> *Time:* 2012-08-18, 17:34:30
> *Subject:* Re: Monads as computing elements
>
>   Dear Roger,
>
>     From what I have studied of Leibniz' Monadology and commentary by many
> authors, it seems to me that all appearances of interactions is given
> purely in terms of synchronizations of the internal action of the monads.
> This synchronization or co-ordination seems very similar to Bruno's Bp&p
> idea but for an apriori given plurality of Monads. I identify the
> computational aspect of the Monad with a unitary evolution transformation
> (in a linear algebra on topological spaces).
>     I have been investigating whether or not it might be possible to
> define the mereology of monads in terms of the way that QM systems become
> and unbecome entangled with each other. Have you seen any similar
> references to this latter idea?
>
>
> On 8/18/2012 11:58 AM, Roger wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen P. King
>
> In the end, as Leibniz puts it,  you couldn't tell the difference, they
> would
> "seem" to have windows, but actually, since substances,
> being logical entities, cannot actually interact,
> (the CPU) which presumably reads and writes on them.
>
> I think they are like subprograms, with storage files,
> which can't do anything by themselves, but must be
>  operated on by the CPU according to their
> current perceptions (stored state data) which
> reflect all of the other stored state date in
>
>
> Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
>
>
>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
> "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
> ~ Francis Bacon
>
>  --
> 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
> For more options, visit this group at
>

--
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