Dear Koichiro,

With due respect for you and for the people you mention, there may be a fatal 
error in the initial description of the key relationships you mention as 
dichotomies. Unless, in all but the most trivial cases, you allow for 
interaction and sharing of the effective dynamic properties of the phenomena 
you are looking at, getting new insights into the way they evolve will continue 
to be difficult. In particular, neither actuality nor potentiality go to 0 or 1.

The major contribution of Lupasco was to break through the strait-jacket of the 
concept of totally independent classes that follow standard bivalent logic. You 
seem to hint at this in your last point which talks in terms of "probabilistic 
events". However, having "explicit and definite distributions" is hardly 
possible in the real world, except as idealized, unrealizable abstractions.

I am hoping that some readers of this note may be moved to consider what, in 
principle, might be achieved by opening up our language in the direction I 
suggest. We might lose some rigor in the narrow sense, but this is proving a 
dead end in any case. Its loss would be compensated by having a greater array 
of logical conceptual tools to work with. 

Thank you and best wishes,

 Joseph




----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht----
Von: cxq02...@nifty.com
Datum: 19.03.2012 23:24
An: <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Betreff: Re: [Fis] FW:  [Fwd: Re:  Physics of computing]--Plamen S.

Folks,

   A nice thing about the dichotomies such as the actual-potential (Peirce),
einselection-superposition (Schroedinger), figure-background (Merleau-Ponty), 
filling-up - void
(Marijuan), presence-absence (Deacon) and the like is the appraisal of the 
individual-class
dichotomy even if an exhaustive list of the individuals constituting the class 
is not available. The
price we have to pay for this, however, is that first person descriptions would 
have to be employed
for appreciating the presence of some individuals that are currently absent on 
the spot for whatever
reasons. In contrast, the individual-class dichotomy accessible to third person 
descriptions such as
the dichotomy of each probabilistic event and its distribution would have to be 
explicit and
definite with regard to both the individuals and the class from the outset.

   Cheers,
   Koichiro Matsuno

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to