Helmut, list
1] I myself, have supported the concept of increased and increasing
diversity and complexity as an explanation for the emergence of novel
forms of matter. But that's hardly specific to me - not only was that
an explanation provided by Peirce [see 1.59-160--][6.57-59 - but it is
also provided by many scientists.
2] For you to equate the work of scientists in physics, chemistry
and biology, exploring the reality of the continued emergence of
diversity and novelty in areas such as quantum theory, zero-point
energy etc - and merge this research with fraudulent sales claims for
fake 'miracle products' is illogical and unfounded.
Edwina
On Tue 03/08/21 10:54 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List Nothing is problematic about that, the way you have
put it. It surely is a fact of reality, and of empirical observation.
But I think, there always should be mentioned what you have added, the
WHY-question. Jon´s weasel-reference I do understand. There are
galore pseudoscientific books, written by self-authorized gurus who
claim having understood how the world works, and they use by them
weaselized words like quantum-theory, fine structure, vacuum-, or
zero-point-energy, et cetera, in order to get disciples, and to sell
their paraphernalia, wands, pendulums, purifying crystals, and
miracle medicines. I am sure, some of them also use "emergence".
Best, Helmut 03. August 2021 um 16:30 Uhr
"Edwina Taborsky"
wrote: Helmet, list - I’m not sure of your point. What’s
problematic about saying that emergence is a fact of reality; ie
it’s not a part of logic but of empirical observation. Now, to
move on from this empirical observation of WHAT is observed to a
hypothesis of WHY this is occurring is a completely separate step.
And of course, has to be taken, if we wish to understand the world.
I admit I didn’t understand Jon Aubrey’s reference to weasel and
he didn’t explain.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 3, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
Edwina, List I am absolutely not against using the term, but
against stopping at for example: "Life has emerged due to nature´s
intention to form higher complexity". This would be using something,
in this case "intention", that is a trait of life. So it is a
tautology, like Peirce´s opium-example. But if you either add, that
saying this is not meant to be an already complete explanation, or if
you investigate this nature´s intention, e.g with the semiosic
method, I think it is justified and not a weasel-word. And I think,
that the semiosic investigation is not completed, that´s why I
think, that the phenomenon emergence is not fully explained. Partly
so, because "habit" is such a word too, I suspect, that should not
just be taken for granted, but itself further investigated. Best,
Helmut 03. August 2021 um 14:46 Uhr
"Edwina Taborsky"
wrote:
Helmut - how is the term of 'emergence' used to explain something
else? What is this 'something else' that is being explained? And are
you saying that 'emergence' is a 'not fully explained phenomenon'?
The abductive reality is: that a novel form of life 'emerges' as a
discrete actuality, a 'mode of being' in 2ns. This can be a new beak
form on a bird; a new plant; even...the emergence of multi-celled
organisms. Or even, within the symbolic realm, a new word. So- one
has to ask: How does this happen? It's a legitimate question and
certainly can't be answered with the old methods of: 'The Gods did
it', or the later method of: 'Random accidents'. There could be a
semiosic method!!
Edwina
On Tue 03/08/21 4:24 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de [3] sent:
Jon, Edwina, List It becomes a weasel, if people use it for
explaining something else, instead of treating it as a yet not fully
explained phenomenon. Then it is like the "dormative virtue" of Opium
(Peirce). A pseudo-explanation. Best Helmut 02. August 2021 um
18:48 Uhr
"Jon Awbrey"
wrote: Edwina,
It is what one calls a "weasel word".
People who invoke "emergence" almost
always say they know what the basics
are ... and then a miracle occurs ...
or some threshold is crossed ... and
then higher order somewhats or other
"emerge" from the lower order stuffs.
In regard to signs, emergence rumors
would have you believe symbols arise
from the primordial muck and ooze of
icons and indices -- there's the rub!
Triadic Relation Irreducibility says
triadic relations are the primordial
stuff -- if not there from the first,
there is no way they can ever emerge.
Cheers,
Jon
On 8/2/2021 12:10 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
>
> Jon - could you explain? I don't see any reductionism when one
uses the term 'emergence'.
>
> You are perhaps associating the term with a mechanical process
where a,b,c,d mix up and might produce a large A.
>
> But, using the categorical processes of chemical and cellular
modes
> in 1ns and 3ns, you can arrive at a totally novel instantiation,
2ns.
>
>
> Edwina
> On Mon 02/08/21 12:04 PM , Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net [4] sent:
> Hi Edwina,
> I find talk of “emergence” is almost invariably a kind of
backhanded reductionism.
> Cheers,
> Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to
REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
peirce-L@list.iupui.edu [5] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to
l...@list.iupui.edu [6] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE
of the message and nothing in the body. More at
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html [7] .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary
Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell. _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to
REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
peirce-L@list.iupui.edu [8] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to
l...@list.iupui.edu [9] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE
of the message and nothing in the body. More at
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html [10] .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary
Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to
REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to
PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the
SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html [11] . ►
PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond;
and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
Links:
------
[1]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'h.raul...@gmx.de\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[2]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'tabor...@primus.ca\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[3]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'h.raul...@gmx.de\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[4]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'jawb...@att.net\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[5]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'peirce-L@list.iupui.edu\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[6]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'l...@list.iupui.edu\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[7] https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html
[8]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'peirce-L@list.iupui.edu\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[9]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'l...@list.iupui.edu\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[10] https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html
[11] https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu
with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the
body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
