Hi Chris, hi all,
Chris Lofting wrote:
>
> The moment Godel made the distinction of Complete from incomplete, the
> moment Heisenberg made the distinction of certain from uncertain, they both
> demonstrated properties of the neurologically sourced METHOD of analysis,
> namely applying dichotomies recursively.
>
> The moment you assert X/~X, and then try to 'refine' this assertion when you
> discover that things seem not to be so 'black and white', you entangle the
> elements of the dichotomy such that you build-in uncertainty/incompleteness
> as properties of the thing under analysis.
[...]
I find your articles always very fascinating, and they partly had given impulse
to my 'system'-concept, in which I try to generalize this idea in effort to
structure Pirsigs level, besides this is still quite vague to me.
It takes me always at least two times of reading, to get the meaning, which has
obviously nothing to do with the structure and the language of your posts, and
so I try to understand on my own.
One question I still have about your 'X/~X-notion'. Should that mean -
concerning your thoughts about the influence of dichotomies - A human being is
differentiating between a thing X and everything else, which is obviously not X
(~X). Can one consider ~X as the complement to X; so the amount of all
observable, only X substracted?
Wish you well,
JoVo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:51 BST