From Joseph Brenner
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Joseph Brenner <mailto:joe.bren...@bluewin.ch>
*To:* Jerry LR Chandler <mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@me.com> ;
fis@listas.unizar.es <mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
*Sent:* Monday, December 09, 2013 10:12 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Fis] Nomino-realism and the encoding and decoding of
communications; Joseph reply to Jerry
Dear Jerry,
Thank you for the specific question, to which I reply as follows: Logic
in Reality is not a logic of propositions. It is not truth-functional.
Hence, it has neither premises nor conclusions (nor modal operators,
etc.) Your expectation in this case is unreasonable. LIR cannot be
judged by the criteria for other logics since it expands the domain of
logic itself.
Logic in Reality looks at the relative degrees of actuality and
potentiality of the opposing elements of a real, physical process. These
are something like non-standard probabilities. OF COURSE the terms go
back to Aristotle, but in LIR they are reinterpreted in the terms of the
dualities and self-dualities of modern physics. Note also that Aristotle
did not discuss actuality moving to potentiality, which is necessary for
a more complete picture.
LIR is a logic, however, and not a physics because it allows reasoned
inferences about the evolution of the system.
Elsewhere you wrote (snippet)
I would argue that physical atomism is the ultimate source of both
biological and mechanical codes necessary to generate communication
between two independent but relative systems.
'Physical atomism' might be the source of codes as abstractions from
real atoms, but the emergence and dynamics of relative systems (which in
my view can only be interdependent) have as their source the ultimate
energetic ground of the universe and reflect its antagonistic
properties. Logic in Reality, thus, given its features which I have
outlined above, /is a logic of biological communication/, based on
physical principles, which you have asked for in your response to Krassimir.
Thanks again and best wishes,
Joseph
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Jerry LR Chandler <mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@me.com>
*To:* fis@listas.unizar.es <mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
*Sent:* Monday, December 09, 2013 12:55 AM
*Subject:* [Fis] Nomino-realism and the encoding and decoding of
communications
List, Joseph, Kassimir, Bob U:
(This is a continuation of my inquiry into role of universals in
biological communication.)
Joseph:
After reflecting on the roots of your system of "Logic of Reality"
as grounded in potentiality and actuality I remain as puzzled as
ever. These two terms are widely used in philosophy and physics.
Indeed, historically, it appears these terms are translations from
the Greek terms of Aristotle.
So, why am I puzzled? Because I do not find a path from these terms
to the terminology used by logicians. While logic itself is an
utter disaster (in the scientific sense of a unitary discipline) ,
one point that most authors agree upon is a logical statement allows
one to draw a conclusion. By extension, I expect a system of logic
would allow a systematic method for drawing conclusions. Do you
find this to be an unreasonable expectation?
What am I missing?
Kassimir:
I suspect you are mis-reading the message that I seek to communicate.
You write:
Information interaction is exchanging of information models.
In other words, you and I do not share a common "information model".
By citing Shannon, you suggest that the information model of Shannon
is sufficient for (mechanical?) communication.
But what is the notion of universality that you are pre-supposing?
Is it merely Euclidian mathematics?
My assertion is that one needs a nomino-realistic notion of
"information model" in order to encode biological communication.
That is, the names are not arbitrary abstractions but necessarily
must be constructed from parts. The logic for this assertion are
physical principles - physical atomism and the associated
mathematics of physical conservation principles. In other words,
the arbitrary assignment of mathematical variables (names) will not
generate a logic of biological communication.
This conclusion is reached as a semiotic necessity - that is, the
semiosis intrinsic to a mutual shared "information model" that
operates between mathematics and physical atomism does NOT exist.
The antecedent model (information model) does not generate the
consequent model and hence no conclusions can be drawn. To make
this point sharper, the physics community in general rejected the
notion of physical atoms prior to the experimental and theoretical
work between 1900 - 1930 (Rutherford, Bohr, Schodinger,...)
I note substantial parallelism between your views and those of my
colleague, Bob Ulanowicz, in the limited sense that engineering
mathematics plays a critical role in the structures of your arguments.
The concept of "nomino-realism" demands a richer mathematics, far
richer than the typical engineering mathematics.
The terms of this mathematics must be sufficiently rich to allow
logicians to construct names from the properties of the terms. That
necessity is the basis of the limitation of the classical
mathematical views of universals, such as variables and such
mathematical structures as "categories".
At the simple level of natural language communication, a
speaker/listener of Russian and a speaker/listener of Chinese
(pre-supposing that both are mono-linguistic) can not communicate
because the encoding and decoding processes are not mutual. This is
a simple metaphor for the abstract concepts that I seek to
communicate in the more general representation of mathematical
symbols. When are they nominal? When are they realistic? And when
must they be both nominal and realistic? Biological communication
requires BOTH!
Cheers
Jerry
Headwater House
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
