DM, The dice example is one reason I prefer probability to possibility. The closer one is to the NOW moment or Whitehead's actual occasion the more restricted the realm of the possible becomes. At the moment of actualization probability is at 100%. It happens. Moving into the future or into the past we are once again in the realm of probability/possibility. I get the feeling the Whitehead regards the past as fixed. I do not.
Krimel --------------------------- Krim Not for me, when we role a dice it has six very well defined possibilities, only one of which will form its situation on landing. Same goes for all other processes. Including new ones, like what will be the properties of a new material we create? We have some idea what these might be, but we can only discover the actual properties by creating the material. Or we fight a war. Many outcomes are possible, limited in range by the outset (which we may not be able to fully foresee), yet which of the outcomes will occur is uncertain. Such is life not just thought. DM ------------------------------------------- > DM, > > I am pretty sure Whitehead saw himself as adding yet another footnote to > Plato, a lengthy and complex one to be sure. I am troubled by the idea of > these forms or ideals or primordial nature just floating around in some > kind > of Star Trek like subspace, waiting to be actualized. Haven't ruled it out > but it just doesn't feel right. I think I know what you mean by this realm > of the possible. That is to say I know what I mean by it. But when we are > making a distinction between out interior reality and TiTs all of this > ideal > stuff seems more a product of the former than the later. > > Krimel > > ---------------------- > Krim > > Plato and Whitehead are rather different. Plato suggested ideal forms > to explain universals. Whitehead is concerned with process and is > trying to describe it. He is therefore forced to look at the status of the > many possible outcomes a situation possesses. For Whitehead a process > occurs when a single possible (of many) is chosen to become actual (one). > I cannot see any other or better way to describe process. Without the > possible we are stuck with a reality of combinations where nothing truly > new ever emerges. Plato's forms are a limited set of ideals, > Whitehead's includes all possible forms. As Shimon Malin argues, > Whitehead's > philosophy fits very well with QT. I'd suggest the actual is a subset of > the > > possible, > that what is expressed in the actual is an exploration or journey through > the possible, > i.e. one particular journey or path through it. A journey we help to > direct, > > but > influenced by what hasgone before, so that we can only keep walking from > where we are standing, where we have reached. If the cosmos collapses > and re-bangs, we could enjoy another journey from the sphere of the > anything > is possible, through another expression/iteration =actuality. > > DM > > ------------------------------------------- >> DM, >> >>>From what I have gathered on this I think Whitehead makes the same >>>mistake >> as Plato in thinking the world of forms (primordial nature of God) is >> more >> real than the grubby one we live in. I prefer to think the world of forms >> is >> abstracted from this one by scrubbing off the rough edges. >> >> Krimel >> >> ------------------------- >> >> Krim >> >> Good point I think, cos Whitehead addressed this himself >> I believe. You have to cut to the key aspects and zoom >> in and out. >> >> DM >> >> >> ------------------------------ >>>> [Krimel] >>>> Any idea why Whitehead felt the need to explain ongoing creation >>>> instant >>>> by >>>> instant? It would seem that beyond the initial mystery of the Big Bang >>>> and >>>> the creation of space/time things roll along pretty smoothly. >>>> >>> >>> DM: Sure I covered this, because every situation has a large number >>> of possible futures and each moment requires a decision-event as to >>> which >>> of the many possibles becomes the next actual situation. And as >>> Shimon Malin points out, quantum theory agrees. >>> >>> [Krimel] >>> True enough but having to metaphysically analyze moment to moment not >>> only a >>> whole new universe but a whole new set of rules for it gets really old >>> really quick. The assumption of continuity between the past, present and >>> future seems not only pragmatically justified but a real time saver. >>> >>> It's like I don't mind the occasional probing question but only up until >>> the point that a migraine sets in. >>> >>> >>> 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/
