From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Tue Oct 25 2005 - 00:09:48 BST
[Ian]
Mark, my view on this,
... is that "chaos" provides the feedstock and
breeding ground for
evolution, the opportunities for DQ to exploit -
ranging from the
mutations
where these are the classic Darwinian randomly
generated kind, or any
of the
neo-Darwinian, emergent pattern, inevitable
engineering solution driven
changes. (Of course that range is the same distinction
as between
classic
and formal chaos.)
Thinking at loud (and in a bit of a hurry as usual)
your mental picture
/
graph - with order / unitary / static quality at one
end, with classic
chaos
at the other infinite extreme, and with the "sweet
spot" of DQ, (or
harmony
/ resonance or formal chaotic / emergent pattern /
strange attractors)
at
the interesting point in between - still holds a lot
of attraction for
me.
Mark:
Hi Ian, This last is driving my thoughts.
Describing true random noise is rather tricky in MOQ
terms i think. In fact, it can sort of begin to sound
like an indescribable DQ. I don't like that.
So, to get around that, i think MOQ chaos would have
to be patterned noise - defined in that it is
conditioned noise. Biological cancer and social frenzy
may be examples of patterns which have gone wild?
But see? In order to accommodate this, we may have to
introduce secondary ontology? This all ties together
quite well if you begin to grasp it: Primary
ontological patterns may combine into chaotic, or
coherent (sweet spot) or dead (so static it looks
dead) relationships.
I don't think this postulation is compatible with your
view of chaos as a feedstock and breeding ground for
evolution. In fact, it suggests the opposite: The more
complex and sophisticated patterns become, the more
able they are to chaos and death - they are migrating
toward DQ, hence my thought that patterns may be
fleeing chaos as well. See?
Ian:
Interestingly, you may have noticed, I have an
opposite argument going
on
with a physicist on my "anthropic principle" thread,
which suggests
that
even the evolution of higher life / intelligence is
just the 2nd Law of
Thermodynamics relentless (teleological) drive to
increase
(net) entropy / chaos. But don't let that put you off,
yet :-)
Mark:
This doesn't work in MOQ terms Ian so you've won the
argument: The key is discrete levels and
anti-reductionism; Biological, Social and Intellectual
patterns defy the 2nd law of T.
[Case]
I think the cleavage of reality into Chaos and Order
is really what the
MoQ
is all about. As I have state previously I see it as
the fundamental
ontology of the MoQ. Quality is the preception of
harmony. It is where
things are right, when the motorcycle is tuned and
purring, when people
see
that the putting together a barbeque grill is really
sculpture, when
the
sophist lays down with the dialectisian. All this
happens with opposing
forces are in balance. We call it Quality.
Mark:
Hi Case, I'm postulating a quite specific role for
chaos: The sweet spot or 'It' or DQ lies on a
continuum of secondary ontological relationships, with
chaos on one side and death on the other.
In your terms, Quality is a balance between chaos and
death.
The only way i can get this to work in MOQ terms is to
invent secondary ontology. You've criticised all this
in previous threads, so i appreciate your position.
However, all the great examples you provide -
Motorcycle at the sweet spot of tinning, barbeque as
art, sophist with dialectic in his back pocket can all
be described as secondary ontological events balanced
between chaotic noise and bland stasis:
1.
a. Motorcycle. It has a sweet spot, that is an
empirical observation.
b. A cycle driven to destruction is chaotic.
c. A cycle neglected turns to rust.
2.
a. A barbeque may be assembled 'the best way' = sweet
spot.
b. A barbeque may be destroyed under bad assembly.
c. A neglected structure such as this never fulfils
its function.
3.
a. There is the best solution to a logically
delineated system of organisation. "...the rules that
must guide the choice are extremely fine and delicate
(sweet spot?) It’s almost impossible to state them
precisely; they must be felt rather than formulated."
(Poincare in ZMM.)
b. There is chaotic noise of information. "It doesn’t
merely make the most combinations possible according
to certain fixed laws. The combinations so obtained
would he exceedingly numerous, useless and
cumbersome."
c. No enthusiasm, no insight, no progress.
"Mathematics, he said, isn’t merely a question of
applying rules, any more than science."
Mark
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 25 2005 - 01:10:47 BST