[MD] patterns of interaction

[Ian Glendinning]

118, you said
"It seems that Wittgenstein likes to present metaphysics as some kind
of Math equation."

His Tractatus and early work sure reads that way, but that was a
deliberate and extreme exploration (a huge practical joke at the
expense of Russell et al IMHO) demonstrating the absurdity of such a
purely mathematical-logic view.

It's clear from his later work, that his own real world view was the
experience of language and the language of experience. (Real language,
like real experience, is full of recursion.) Stick with him, kid.

Ian

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:24 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Marsha,
> I am glad you liked it.  Personally I do not care much for
> Wittgenstein and his deconstructionist methods.  However, he does
> support your idea of separating everything into patterns, as
> illuminating.  Of course this is what I do all the time in science,
> where much is explained in terms of process.  Welcome to my world!
>
> It seems that Wittgenstein likes to present metaphysics as some kind
> of Math equation.  Being immersed in scientific understanding, I do
> not think this may be the right format for MoQ for the analytical can
> only bring one inside and perhaps perspective is lost in the meantime.
>
> The patterns approach divides things up.  After doing so, it is
> important to integrate it back together, otherwise it would seem that
> you simply end up with a lot of parts (or patterns I guess).  I am
> sure you are moving towards that, and I respect your view if often I
> do not understand it.
>
> In my opinon, I do not believe that Pirsig is necessarily fond of this
> approach since he does not care much for scientific inquiry as a great
> revealer, but maybe you are correct and I misread Pirsig on this.
> Perhaps others have a comment on this.
>
> It could be correct that Wittgenstein does speak directly to MoQ, and
> there is a need to deconstruct in order to better understand, I am
> easy.  By the way, was this from his Tractatus or post-Tractatus
> period.  It makes a difference since he changed his view on some
> fundamental grounds.  I also believe that Wittgenstein claimed that
> all philosophy is somewhat silly, since it is playing around with
> words.   But, maybe  that is an urban legend.
>
> Perhaps you could explain how Wittgenstein views are related to MoQ.
>
> I am just trying to stay on track in terms of discussing MoQ.  You
> certainly support Tuukka's recursive approach, so you may be going in
> the right direction.  I am adventurous, so carry on.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> On 1/30/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>> In mental process, the effects of differences are to be regarded as
>> transforms of the difference which preceded them... [D]ifferences... and
>> their trains of effects in promoting other differences become material of
>> information, redundancy, pattern, and so on. — Bateson, Mind and Nature
>>
>> "How then can there be causality without agents? And, more specifically, how
>> is it that our sense-faculties came to be receptive to the particular types
>> of stimuli that impinge upon them, which together give rise to our world of
>> experience? Our capacities for such awareness of distinctions did not arise
>> uncaused, nor are they without their own consequences. They developed in
>> dependence upon previous kinds of experience and in turn condition the kinds
>> of experience, the kinds of cognitive awareness, that may arise in the
>> future. The momentary arising of the discernment of differences is thus part
>> of a larger feedback cycle in which "the effects of differences are to be
>> regarded as transforms of the difference which preceded them." These two
>> notions—circular causality, in the form of recursive feedback processes, and
>> epigenesis, wherein the results of previous events serve as the basis for
>> succeeding ones—comprise another area where Buddhist philosophy has much in
>> common with scientific models of causality, particularly those of cognitive
>> science and evolutionary biology. In both perspectives, these models turn
>> our attention away from independent acts of isolated entities and toward
>> particular patterns of interaction that give rise both to immediate forms of
>> cognitive awareness and, in the long run, to the living forms we all embody.
>> That is, this circular causality operates at both micro and macro levels."
>>
>>
>>       (http://www.gampoabbey.org/documents/Buddhist-Steps.pdf)
>>
>>
>>
>> Marsha:
>> This is a really great paper addressing cognitive experience.  I will not
>> post another quote, but I sincerely hope you read it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html