Dear Walter, These are perfectly ordinary questions that are extraodinarily difficult to answer rapidly. Let me try anyway:
1. The Hegelian structure of thesis - antithesis -synthesis is in my terms abstract and idealized, applicable to linguistic entities. What is the driving force, even in Hegelian terms, that enables movement from one stage to the other? 2. Real systems, on the other hand, have a dynamics, usually driven by some form of energy gradient. My approach is different in that I attribute a logic to the resulting changes, which seem to follow a pattern of alternating predominance of first one element, then the opposing one. The complementarity of the determinability of momentum and position in a quantum particle is a model of this "alternation", but it is much more complex at higher levels, e.g., the departure from and return to sanity in the government of the United States. 3. What is real is always real at all moments, although it may appear to be an illusion or appearance of some sort. 4. I have presented a formal picture of the systems of systems of actualizations and potentializations as transfinite chains of implication in my book. 5. There is no basic difference, in my view, between the values of fuzzy logic and the 0, 1 and 1/2 of Lukasiewicz. Both types refer to truth values of some kind, and the limiting values of 0 and 1 are included in the set. My reality values refer to actual states of the processes in question, and the limits are never reached, but only approached asymptotically. 6. For the above reasons, I think LIR is indeed a new form of logic. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "fis" <fis@listas.unizar.es> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:01 PM Subject: [Fis] Msg. from W. Riofrio streams of order (III): Logic Dear Joseph and colleagues I only try to understand the sketch of your LIR logic. Could you explain or clarify some of my questions? - Although some of your statements may resemble the relation 'thesis-antithesis-synthesis'; I am interested if you could explain to what extent your approach is different or add a new way to approach the dynamics in real systems. - What are the 'stuffs of reality' in your proposal? What are your compromises on 'what is real' in some specific moment? And how to identify that it is not the case in another moment? - Is it possible; in principle, that your proposal could be formalized? Maybe using some form of ?fuzzy logic? is your bed or we are talking about on a really new form of logic? Thank you. Sincerely, Walter *************************************** Walter Riofrio Theoretical and Evolutionary Biology Researcher Associate Professor; Peruvian University Cayetano Heredia. Chercheur Associé; Complex Systems Institute (ISC-PIF). E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **************************************** _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
