Dear Joseph, Why would one limit this to two possible perspectives like foreground and background? The famous Escher-Goedel-Bach triplet already indicates that one can have three orthogonal perspectives at each moment of time. Including time, one would have four possible (and increasinlgy orthogonal) perspectives.
I elaborated on this in "The Non-linear Dynamics of Sociological Reflections," International Sociology 12 (1997) 25-45. [preprint version available at http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/commsoc.htm] For example, one can understand why structural-functionalism and symbolic interactionism are different research traditions in sociology while studying similar phenomena. With best wishes, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-20- 525 3681 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joseph Brenner > Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 9:17 AM > To: Pedro C. Marijuan; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Fis] streams of order (III): Logic > > Dear Colleagues (and Anti-leagues?), > > Pedro has just called attention, again, to a possible role of logic in > facilitating new approaches to seemingly intractable problems and > divergences of opinion. The question is "What logic?" In my > view, it cannot > be any classical or neo-classical bivalent predicate logic or > its modal or > tense extensions. The reason is that these all have, as their > elements, some > classical truth values or their mathematical equivalents. > > As some of you know, I have recently had published a book, > entitled Logic in > Reality, that sets forth a new kind of logic (LIR) extended to real > phenomena, including object entities seen primarily as processes and > including theories as well as the subjects of those theories. > This logic is > grounded in what I see as the fundamental, oppositional > dualities in nature. > It is a logic of Conditional Contradiction: A and non-A can > exist at the > same time when there is an interaction between them, but only > to the extent > that when A is actual (and never to the extent of 100%), > non-A is potential > (also never to the extent of 100%) alternately and > reciprocally. Since this > is a new logical system with essentially no literature, it is > difficult to > outline it without "giving the whole book". Those of you interested in > reading more may wish to get the book which is now available > either from > Springer Verlag > ( > http://www.springer.com/philosophy/logic/book/978-1-4020-8374- > 7?detailsPage= > toc )or Amazon. > > In the meantime, let me just try to show how the "principle of dynamic > opposition" I espouse might play itself out in some of the > themes discussed > by Pedro in this thread: > > · Disciplines: disciplines that give radically different > interpretations of the same phenomenon do not have to be > combined, mixed or > superimposed in an arbitrary manner. One "moves" > epistemologically from an > emphasis (actualization) of one to emphasis on the other. > > · Streams of order: outside the laboratory, streams of order do > interact (compound upon each other), but the process is not totally > disorganized. It will tend in the direction 1) of identity, diversity > (non-contradiction) > or maximum interaction (counter-action or contradiction) from > which a new > entity may emerge; or 2) without any clear direction (this discussion, > sometimes), but both processes can been seen as logical chains of > implication, hence scientific, hence manageable. > > · Order and disorder: simply, no real process is > totally ordered or > disordered, and does not have to be so considered in my > logic. Every process > includes both a tendency to degradation of information (via > the 2nd Law) and > creation of new information, morphogenesis, new functionality based > ultimately on the differentiation or diversification of > elements possible > due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle for electrons. > > · Adaptability in an informational vision: I claim > that LIR includes > an new element of structure that is common to such domains as cells, > societies and brains that avoids absolute separation between > "internal" and > "external", "presence" and "absence" in phenomena that are > sufficiently > complex. The problems associated with "self-"production or > autopoësis are > avoided since the information necessary for emergence of higher level > entities is carried not only by the actualities but the > potentialities of > the lower-level elements (atoms, chemicals, macromolecules, > organs, etc.) > > I hope that this "absolutely" minimum presentation of my > logical approach > will promote some feedback that I can use in refining my > ideas and making > them more pertinent to our concerns. > > Best wishes, > > Joe Brenner > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 2:05 PM > Subject: Re: [Fis] streams of order (III) > > > Dear discussants and FIS colleagues, > > I much appreciate Bob's comments, as I also observe a strong mutual > concordance. The absences theme, which I could not comment > last day, was > also present in ideas I developed years ago on cell "functional voids" > (absences, needs) as a leit motif of cellular signaling. Actually I > pointed out that the creation, exchange, elimination of signals may be > inseparable of sets of absences wich are compressed or symbolized in a > few related presences, then traded as communication items in > intercellular "markets". Much of human communication is related to > absences too, e.g., "needs". > > Helas, a good theoretical scheme (info theory, mutual info, etc.) is a > must, but something else is needed for the inclusion of meaning. In my > opinion, the cell cycle, and the human life cycle --referring to these > two particular info realms-- have to be entered as the global > references > to anticipate the meanings structure. I am not aware that a good > solution to this problem has been contemplated yet (how can one treat > the signal, the void, the cycle, the networking alterations?). In the > human case, it is the action/perception cycle which serves as the > universal susbtratum for organizing behaviors what tends the > fabrication > of meaning. How adaptation, time scales, open-ended > computing, etc., may > culminate in meaning extraction? How can one advance to > properly situate > human "knowledge" here? (I quite agree with Loet in the need > of entering > it). And further, how can one jump to establish the conditions for > scientific and multidisciplinary meaningfulness? Besides, I bet that a > reconsideration of logic should be involved (Joe, Karl....) > > In itself, this whole enterprise is a big, serious research project, > highly interesting today in order to make sense of the widespread > dissemination of knowledge of inter-, pluri-, multi-, > trans-disciplinary > nature. Let me remind Ted's insistence on the importance of a real > problem meaningfully contemplated by FIS in a new way... Thus, the new > Institute promoted by Dail & Mary Joe & Wolfgang might take > this project > of "approaching multidisciplinarity" under its wings. > > Finally, about Stan's protests of my succint point on science > unification, his scholarship obligues one to recognize elegant points > even in parties which may actually invite others to advance towards > factual cul-de-sacs. Next week (this is my second weekly post) I will > try to expand this. Science appears far more interesting when > we do not > idealize it, and when a limited, situated observer > substitutes for God's > view (and when disciplines are factically unable to bridge or "reduce" > their epistemic gaps, etc. --so the real mess!) > > best wishes > > Pedro > > _______________________________________________ > fis mailing list > [email protected] > https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > _______________________________________________ > fis mailing list > [email protected] > https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > _______________________________________________ fis mailing list [email protected] https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
