Friday, August 28, 2009

The Blind ‘Black Box’__Ergodicity...

Sandia National Laboratories Peircean Induction Graphic
John Pollock __ The Mystery Link _ Embodied Perception
Bourdieu’s Three Relations of Knowledge Claims
The Economic Mind of Charles Sanders Peirce, by James R. Wible
Complete Economics, Physics, Philosophy Image Library...
What's A Trillion Dollars Look Like...?

History has many blind spots, but none so great as exists in political economic science, or the author should say, the non-science of political economics. Let it be stated right from the start; ‘methodological individualism’, or ‘rational choice theory’ fails to scientifically produce any viable logical syllogistic conclusions, due to the facts not existing in epistemic individualism(the individual must look out, as well as in, for the total truth)__unless the whole is also considered in the initial premises. This theory has a long history of claiming more than is even possible of an epistemic agent of rational choices, and due to more than any other factor, of ignoring ‘irrational choice theory’, ‘uncertainty’ and the many mathematical statistical unknowns of and in the social sciences domain, especially as logically relates to the greater aggregates of outside influences(which simultaneously exist) of other and most often opposing nations of epistemic and ontological competitors, as whole states and aggregates of greater magnitude states, of actions upon not only one’s own ontic nation’s facts, but every epistemic individual agent’s facts as well. In logic theories of the above, the greater aggregates of outside states rational and irrational epistemic and ontic actions, can obviously over-whelm any epistemic rational choice actions of the primary state, as she is simply mathematically outnumbered and out-powered by said ontic actions and outside epistemic intelligences. (Continued...)

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

The Logic of Self, Creating Self, Within The Greater Self…

Epistemology, Rationality, and Cognition, by J. Pollock

"Two things here are all-important to assure oneself of and to remember. The first is that a person is not absolutely an individual. His thoughts are what he is "saying to himself," that is, is saying to that other self that is just coming into life in the flow of time. When one reasons, it is that critical self that one is trying to persuade; and all thought whatsoever is a sign, and is mostly of the nature of language. The second thing to remember is that the man's circle of society (however widely or narrowly this phrase may be understood), is a sort of loosely compacted person, in some respects of higher rank than the person of an individual organism." C.S. Peirce

"Truth is that concordance of an abstract statement with the ideal limit towards which endless investigation would tend to bring scientific belief, which concordance the abstract statement may possess by virtue of the confession of its inaccuracy and one-sidedness, and this confession is an essential ingredient of truth."CSP

Everyone has traveled the tumultuous emotional and intellectual path of life, in search of the great ‘Riddle of the Sphinx’__few have succeeded__most are still searching__many have given up. This author is no exception, yet having traveled a longer and more varied journey than most, may have stumbled across the great secret of homunculus. Philosophers and intellectuals of all ages have trekked the shores of this knowledge and wisdom, of self and others, in search of the magical metaphysical and logical keys to the universe__the philosopher’s stone, as it’s been called__but where does it hide? Have you looked directly before your very eyes…? There’s a space there you may not have realized__It’s called ‘Habitus’. It’s a tricky space, not small, not large, but humongous in size, compared to all the other possible thoughts, excepting infinity, that is. Many have named this space, but few have truly investigated its depths of clear waters. This area, of the logical metaphysics of habits, will be thoroughly investigated, to reveal a truth system so simple and obvious, one will be amazed they hadn’t thought of it themselves...

Some 2300 years ago Aristotle, in his metaphysics and ethics, delved into the continuum of mind and thought, but not as deep as he could have, had he recognized the importance of his retroductions’ full possibilities. Socrates and Plato had earlier also investigated the same area, but interpreted the continuum into forms, ideals, ideas and archetypes, which most investigators falsely took to be a synthetic transcendentalism, when in fact it was actually one of the closest attempts of pure explication. Had Aristotle looked deeper into his aesthetic rationalism creating the highest virtuous states of mind, and instead of laying it off to ‘god’, he may have discovered the truth to his deeper investigations of the metaphysics of rational habits. About two millennia later, Kant also came very close with his metaphysics of law, liberty and morality, to discovering the full actions of mind, but concentrated too heavily on the synthetic and moral aspects instead of the aesthetics and esthetics of habits. And finally, Peirce developed the metaphysics of habits as fully as anyone to date, except possibly Bakhtin, Bourdieu and Lefebvre. Though many of history’s greatest minds have investigated the depths of mind and thought, none have yet closed the epistemic, teleological and ontological gaps between feelings and actions, completely. This author is stating, this can and will be done…

One of the most important figures to mention is a little known Russian logician, Nicolai A. Vasiliev, due to these statements;

Logic is based, according to Vasiliev, on geometrical intuition. The basic logical relation, as in geometry, is the relationship between whole and the parts of the whole, reduced to the relation between foundation and its consequences. Foundation is a whole and consequences are its parts. This relation in essence should be assessed as mathematical and it lies at the basis of the syllogistic principle. Logic and mathematics enrich each other. That is why "non-Aristotelian logic is not merely an application to logic of non-Euclidian geometry method; we may argue that non-Euclidian geometry is a special case of the application of the non-Aristotelian method of logic."

“The pseudosphere is in some sense an ideal construction, but under certain physical conditions in the universe, Lobachevsky's imaginary geometry becomes the geometry of real space. "If the world or our sensory faculties are organized in a particular manner, logic must be non-Aristotelian" [Vasiliev 1912a, 238, reprinted 1989, 85]. “Our world and sensory faculties are arranged in such a manner that all immediate sensations are positive. "Negative" sensations actually are negative; they are secondary if compared to positive sensations, and appear when one feature replaces another one that is incompatible with the first one. In a world in which living beings have two kinds of sensations, non-Aristotelian logic surely reigns. To put it another way, the logical laws and principles are determined in the first place by nature of cognitive objects and of the experiences open to the subject, i.e. they are EMPIRICAL”. N.A.Vasiliev

This allows one to see that a non-Aristotlean logic is necessary for modern understanding to take place, just as a non-Euclidian geometry is. It further reinforces the facts already known by many about C.S. Peirce’s non-Aristotlean logics, as all these figures thus far mentioned, except Aristotle, used and or advocated a triadic logic, or polyadic, over the dyadic logics of others, as is shown in Vasiliev’s above quotes… Continued...