Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA00384 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 19 Jun 2000 23:35:45 +0100 Message-Id: <200006192233.SAA10759@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:37:55 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth In-reply-to: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIMEMNCGAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> References: <200006191903.PAA02490@mail3.lig.bellsouth.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:27:26 +1000
Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > Of Joe E. Dees
> > Sent: Tuesday, 20 June 2000 5:07
> > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth
> >
> >
> > Truths are inductively reached, probable and statistical, and
> > therefore provisional, and may be corroborated but never absolutely
> > confirmed, although they may asymptotically approach such
> > certainty to .999+, for the possibility in principle must be retained
> > that future data may indeed contradict them, rendering them false
> > or forcing a modification (science works this way).
>
> really, so some days you exist and other days you dont? :-) I dont think
> there is any probability involved when dealing with self. Probability only
> emerges when you move into group analysis, harmonics analysis of a whole etc.
>
When one is dealing not with the self but with the world, one must
proceed inductively.
>
> Furthermore the feeling of truth is an absolute, EITHER/OR state, when you
> REFLECT on this you move into BOTH/AND states and secondary processes that
> include increased consideration of negation. Here you move into playing with
> the true/false dichotomy that includes the mixing of the elements of that
> dichotomy such that there is an increase in concepts that 'round the edges'
> of the original EITHER/OR distinctions and you enter relativist thinking
> areas (secondary thinking) and the world of statistical interpretations;
> fourier transforms rather than square waves.
>
The only apodictically (self-evidently) certain assertions are
connected with perceptual experience (such as "perception is
happening"); they are phenomenologically foundational for self-
conscious awareness.
>
> There IS a sense of 'truth', a feeling 'rightness', 'correctness' that we
> all have and that feeling is very EITHER/OR, absolute, even if it can be
> wrong.
>
Feee-Lings! Ohh, ohh, ohh Feee-Lings! ;~) I thought we were
discussing not what one felt to be true, or wished to be true, or
believed to be true, but what one could logically, rationally and
reasonably maintain to be true, and this requires evidence of some
sort or other beyond one's emotional proclivities (unless what one
is maintaining is not the truth of X, but that one feels X is true).
>
> Or truths are
> > deductively reached and in the final analysis tautological, being the
> > entailed consequences of assumed axioms in some logical or
> > mathematical abstract ideal conceptual microworld. The difference
> > between truth and belief is the presence or absence of evidence; if
> > there is evidence for X, then X is (provisionally) a truth; if
> > there is not,
> > then X is a belief.
>
> you left out abduction. Induction moves from particulars to a general and
> results in hypothesis formation. Initially there is no hypothesis and so no
> causal process; induction leads or the creation of a model of a causal
> process.
>
Main Entry: ab·duc·tion
Pronunciation: ab-'d&k-sh&n, &b-
Function: noun
Date: 1666
1 : the action of abducting : the condition of being abducted
2 : the unlawful carrying away of a woman for marriage or intercourse
>
I know this is not what you meant, but the meaning given to the
term in Peircean semiotics, is the movement from one particular to
another without recourse to a general. Thus, deduction = universall
to particular, induction = particular to universal, abduction =
particular to particular. Deduction is the strongest, induction
intermediate, and abduction the weakest. There is no term for the
movement from universal to universal, as universal contentions are
considered nonrelational to each other, each summing up
completely its own provenance.
>
> Deduction works from a general (hypothesis) to a particular.
>
> Abduction works from a particular to validate a general; the direction is
> like induction but there is a causal principle behind things. Adduction
> comes from secondary thinking where there is the assumption of meaning, thus
> I discover a particular pattern that I assume is 'meaningful'. To establish
> the meaning I flip through contexts until I find a fit. The other form is
> where I come across a particular pattern that immediately brings a
> context/hypothesis/principle to mind, thus abduction has within it two
> formats, known and unknown.
>
> Note that the context flipping can lead to innovations ( a novel pattern
> emerges) as well as illusions/delusions.
>
> The linking of a local distinction to a general elicits a feeling of
> 'correctness', a sense of absolute. Analysis, secondary thinking, leads to
> the emergence of relativist concepts of truth but there is a FEELING that is
> tracable back to reptilian/fish behaviour manifest in the mapping of
> territory and the 'mine/not mine' dichotomy that is absolute. Compensatory
> behaviours emerge where there is doubt and you move into relativist areas
> where you have to include the perspectives of others (other fish, lizards,
> or humans).
>
> Best,
>
> Chris.
>
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 19 2000 - 23:36:45 BST