On 7/15/09 10:56 AM, "X Acto" <[email protected]> wrote:
Joe,
Well, division by zero is not so much "physically impossible" as it is
"in violation of mathematical axioms."
Division by zero is an operation for which you cannot find an answer,
so it is disallowed. You can understand why if you think about how
division and multiplication are related.
12 divided by 6 is 2 because
6 times 2 is 12
12 divided by 0 is x would mean that
0 times x = 12
But no value would work for x because 0 times any number is 0. So division
by zero doesn't work.
There's a special word for stuff like this, where you could conceivably give
it any number of values. That word is "indeterminate." It's not the same as
undefined. It essentially means that if it pops up somewhere, you don't know
what its value will be in your case. For instance, if you have the limit as
x->0
of x/x and of 7x/x, the expression will have a value of 1 in the first case
and 7
in the second case. Indeterminate.
Hi Ron and all,
Pirsig proposes a metaphysical DQ/SQ. I want to know with what logic he
could he come to such a conclusion? Not mathematical logic since DQ is
evolving not indeterminate and cannot be cancelled out by a negative
evolution in an equation or something like that. I want to examine a logic
that proposes evolution as a brilliant description of reality. The logic of
metaphysics MOQ follows a logic of language subject/object, the intellectual
level (Thanks Bo), but the object in the action of an evolved subject,
remains undefined in the evolution of/with the subject..
In SOM the subject is undefined. The Object defines the subject in the
statement of existence. ³I think therefore I am². Both terms are now in a
defined relationship and the undefined ³I² is now defined in the action.
Imho Pirsig saw that evolution demanded a different metaphysics. In MOQ the
Level in evolution defines the Subject. The Object is defined but the action
of evolution remains undefined. When I perceive something I know the
object. When I conceptualize the relationship, the DQ that I perceive
remains undefined. The evolving level of the Subject remains undefined. It
is impossible to conceptualize DQ. It remains undefined. Mathematics has no
provision for quality evolution, DQ.
What is not present in SOM is the relationship of a defined Subject of
evolution, being coupled with a defined verb producing an undefined
Object/evolving. The action follows the evolving subject. E.G., The action
of gravity on thoughts as compared to the action of gravity on a stone.
Joe
> Joe,
> Well, division by zero is not so much "physically impossible" as it is
> "in violation of mathematical axioms."
> Division by zero is an operation for which you cannot find an answer,
> so it is disallowed. You can understand why if you think about how
> division and multiplication are related.
> 12 divided by 6 is 2 because
> 6 times 2 is 12
>
> 12 divided by 0 is x would mean that
> 0 times x = 12
>
> But no value would work for x because 0 times any number is 0. So division by
> zero doesn't work.
>
> There's a special word for stuff like this, where you could conceivably give
> it any number of values. That word is "indeterminate." It's not the same as
> undefined. It essentially means that if it pops up somewhere, you don't know
> what its value will be in your case. For instance, if you have the limit as
> x->0
> of x/x and of 7x/x, the expression will have a value of 1 in the first case
> and 7
> in the second case. Indeterminate.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Joseph Maurer <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:58:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Reductionism
>
> Hi Bo,
>
> I will work on the complications. Thank you! for your encouragement, and
> the Time you have put into MOQ.
>
> Joe
> On 7/13/09 11:14 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Joe
>>
>> I've noticed comments from you that includes me, but I have
>> developed some eye problem (when gazing at the screen for a long
>> time some strange patterns start to appear) I must simply limit myself
>> ...give priority to "saving the MOQ" :-)
>>
>> However, this your input goes to the heart of the matter:
>>
>>> Imho (in my humble opinion), MOQ (Metaphysics Of Quality) reasonably
>>> changed the basis of the logic of SOM (Subject Object Metaphysics).
>>
>> Right you are.
>>
>>> SOM logic defines an undefined subject by the action of a defining
>>> verb. In the case of dividing by 0 this is illogical. Descartes
>>> states: ³I think therefore I am!²
>>
>> As ZAMM describes it SOM emerged as a result of the Greek
>> philosophical frenzy that brought that culture away from its old quality-
>> based (Aretê) reality. Now, with LILA this must be put into a Q-level
>> context and it's plain that SOM is the intellectual level emerging from
>> Aretê as the social level. And only now can Descartes' statement be
>> evaluated and we see that SOM (with him) had reached its final stage,
>> a mental (mind) realm totally removed the material one. After
>> Descartes - with the empiricist - arose the problem which of the two
>> realms is the real (causes the other) and that see-saw that has gone
>> up and down ever since. This quandary was what brought young
>> Phaedrus to despair and triggered his Quality insight that (as you so
>> correctly say) "...changed the basis of the logic of SOM"
>>
>>> The subject has only intentional existence. Aristotle defines motion
>>> in a similar way: ³The act of a being in potency in as much as it is in
>>> potency.² In SOM the subject is undefined (with only intentional
>>> existence from the object) and becomes defined by the action of the
>>> verb and object. E.g., the man is eating. The ³man² is defined in the
>>> eating, and we can distinguish the ³man² from a statue.
>>
>> This may be correct, but terribly complicated. SOM's problem is that
>> the subject can't exist without the world, and the world not without the
>> subject, i.e. the mind/matter duality is an aggregate and yet SOM's
>> logical base does not allow this so it's plain that a fundamental base
>> shift is needed ... just what the MOQ is and in its light the S/O
>> distinction becomes its STATIC intellectual level. This way the VALUE
>> is retained while the problems dissolve.
>>
>>> In MOQ (Metaphysics of Quality) the subject is defined in an
>>> evolutionary hierarchy. The object, the level of evolution, is
>>> defined in the action, SOL.
>>
>> At least the above about SOM = the intellectual level is the SOL
>> interpretation.
>>
>> Yours sincerely
>>
>> Bodvar
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
