John, Edwina, List,
Sorry to be so brief again, but trying to understand inquiry
and semiosis in general as temporal processes is one of the
things that forced me to develop differential logic as an
extension of propositional logic, for which I naturally
turned to Peirce's logical graphs as a starting point.
See:
Differential Propositional Calculus
• http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Propositional_Calculus
Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems
•
http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems_2.0
The clock indicates the moment . . . . but what does
eternity indicate?
— Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, [Whi, 79]
“It might be thought that an independent time variable needs to be brought in
at this point, but it is an insight of fundamental importance that the idea of
process is logically prior to the notion of time. A time variable is a
reference
to a clock — a canonical, conventional process that is accepted or established
as
a standard of measurement, but in essence no different than any other process.
This raises the question of how different subsystems in a more global process
can be brought into comparison, and what it means for one process to serve
the function of a local standard for others.”
Regards,
Jon
On 11/9/2016 2:25 PM, John F Sowa wrote:
> Edwina, Kirsti, list,
>
> ET
>> I wish we could get into the analysis of time in more detail.
>
> I came across a short passage by Gregory Bateson that clarifies the
> issues. See the attached Bateson79.jpg, which is an excerpt from p. 2
> of a book on biosemiotics (see below). Following is the critical point:
>
> GB
>> thinking in terms of stories must be shared by all mind or minds
>> whether ours or those of redwood forests and sea anemones...
>> A story is a little knot or complex of that species of
>> connectedness which we call relevance.
>
> This observation is compatible with Peirce, but CSP used the term
> 'quasi-mind' to accommodate the species-bias of most humans:
>
> CP 4.551
>> Admitting that connected Signs must have a Quasi-mind, it may further
>> be declared that there can be no isolated sign. Moreover, signs
>> require at least two Quasi-minds; a Quasi-utterer and a Quasi-
>> interpreter; and although these two are at one (i.e., are one mind)
>> in the sign itself, they must nevertheless be distinct. In the Sign
>> they are, so to say, welded. Accordingly, it is not merely a fact
>> of human Psychology, but a necessity of Logic, that every logical
>> evolution of thought should be dialogic.
>
> Re time: We have to distinguish (1) time as it is in reality
> (whatever that may be); (2) time in our stories (which include the
> formalized stories called physics); (3) the mental sequence of
> thought; and (4) the logical sequence (dialogic) of connected signs.
>
> ET
>> The question is: Are the Platonic worlds BEFORE or AFTER the so-called
>> Big Bang? I read them as AFTER while Gary R and Jon S [not John S]
>> read them as BEFORE. In my reading, before the Big Bang, there was
>> Nothing, not even Platonic worlds.
>
> This question is about time sequences in different kinds of stories:
> the Big Bang story about what reality may be; and Platonic stories
> about ideal, mathematical forms.
>
> The time sequence of a mathematical story is independent of the time
> sequence of a physical story. We may apply the math (for example,
> the definitions, axioms, and proofs of a Platonic form) to the
> construction of a physical story.
>
> But that application is a mapping between two stories. The term
> 'prior to' is meaningful only *within* a story, not between stories.
>
> In short, our "commonsense" notion of time is an abstraction from
> the stories we tell about our experience. The time sequences in two
> different stories may have some similarities, but we must distinguish
> three distinct sequences: the time sequences of each story, and the
> time sequence of the mapping, which is a kind of meta-story.
>
> JFS
>>> Does anyone know if [Peirce] had written anything about embedding
>>> our universe in a hypothetical space of higher dimension?
>
> KM
>> I am most interested in knowing more on this.
>
> David Finkelstein, p. 277 of the reference below:
>> Peirce seems to have included geometry in his evolutionism, at least
>> in principle... [He] seems not to have responded to the continuously-
>> evolving physical geometry of Riemann and Clifford... nor to Einstein's
>> conceptual unification of space and time.
>
> In any case, I think that the notion of time as an abstraction from
> stories -- imaginary, factual, or theoretical -- provides a way of
> relating different views. It also allows for metalevel reasoning
> that can distinguish and relate different kinds of stories that
> have independent time scales and sequences.
>
> John
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
> From Google books:
>
> _A Legacy for Living Systems: Gregory Bateson as Precursor
> to Biosemiotics_ edited by Jesper Hoffmeyer, Springer, 2008:
>
https://books.google.com/books?id=dcHqVpZ97pUC&pg=PA246&lpg=PA246&dq=Order+is+simply+thought+embodied+in+arrangement&source=bl&ots=DQUnZlvOYu&sig=X8bH0YAG597uwjyedB4dSf2BuC0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizyZD88JrQAhVENxQKHeEeBwoQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=Order%20is%20simply%20thought%20embodied%20in%20arrangement&f=false
>
>
> David R. Finkelstein, _Quantum Relativity: A Synthesis of the Ideas
> of Heisenberg and Einstein_, Springer, 1996.
>
https://books.google.com/books?id=OvjsCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA277&lpg=PA277&dq=peirce+relativity&source=bl&ots=0rc7kjxqIJ&sig=Hsgtu9_LwZAoDxH7kbVgvWmAfiI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihk4SzpZzQAhWF3YMKHR1kA5wQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=peirce%20relativity&f=false
>
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
