Hi FISers,
(1) Perhaps this has been discussed already either on this lsit or elsewhere, i.e, the possible connection between the Irreducible Triadic Relation (ITR) and Plato's Allegory of the Cave (PAC). Regardless, I would like to propose below my own version of the relation between ITR and PAC. [cid:5ffda82e-0661-4afd-8e02-6119cbe799d2] https://philosophyzer.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/the-allegory-of-the-cave-by-plato-summary-and-meaning/ (2) We can represent ITR diagrammatically as shown in the legend to Table 1 which is also known as the commutative triangle in category theory. As I summarized in the main body of Table 1, the 3 nodes (A, B, & C) and 3 edges (f, g, & h) of the ITR diagram have specific examples in three different systems -- (i) Plato's cave, (ii) natural science, and (iii) semiotics. Table 1. The Irreducible Triadic Relation (ITR) in Plato’s cave, science , and semiotics. f g A --------> B --------> C | ^ | | |_________________| h Agent A B C f g h Plato’s cavemen Form (or Real world) Shadows on the wall Thought Physical laws Perception Universal causality Scientists 4-D structure of enzymes 3-D structure of enzymes Scientific model measurement Interpretation Correlation semioticians Object Sign Interpretant Sign production Sign interpretation Grounding Correlation (3) I am assuming that Plato’s cavemen divide into two groups -- (i) the common cavemen who think (and believe) that the shadows are real, and (ii) the enlightened cavemen whose intellect distinghishes between shadows and the real objects casting them. It may be justified to describe the difference between the way the common cavemen think and the way the enlightened cavemen think as the ‘dyadic thinking’ (i.e, Step f reversed, or A <----- B only) and ‘the triadic thinking’ (i.e., the entire commutative triangle), respectively. (4) I liken to the common cavemen defined above the many briliant and hardworking scientists who believe that studying the static 3-dimensional structures of all the enzymes and proteins in the mitochondrion will eventually solve the mystery of how the organell works in living cells. In this sense, I believe that Plato's allegory of the cave applies to contemproary science. (5) If it can be validated that there are indeed two types of Plato's cavemen and in modern science, it may also apply to information science, leading to the prediction that there will be two kinds of information scientists -- (i) dyadic thinking information scientis and (ii) and triadic thinking information scientis. (6) Finally, One interesting spinoff of Table 1 may be that its Column A sheds new light on what Plato might have meant by his Form or Idea, thus contributing to solving the Plato-Aristotle debate on the Form-Matter dualtiy. Any questions or commens are welcome as always. Sung
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
