Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA21598 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 7 Jul 2000 00:24:26 +0100 Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 09:22:15 +1000 From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIMECMCHAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000707092215@mac463.wehi.edu.au> X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000 05:47:13 +1000 ddiamond@ozemail.com.au (Chris
Lofting) wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On
>Behalf
>> Of Vincent Campbell
>> Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2000 7:39
>> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
>> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - Welcome to My Nightmare Part 2.Bb
>>
>>
>> Thanks for this.
>>
>> You've sprung me on Wittgenstein here, as this is a general sense
>> of what I
>> thought one of Wittgenstein's views was, and not something I can cite
>page
>> refs for. The bit I'm thinking of is the notion that a 'cat' is
>> not a 'cat'
>> because the word contains some essence of the object it is
>describing, but
>> only because 'cat' means 'not a dog', 'not a cow' etc. etc.
>
>This is the viewpoint from the ~A where we can identify something by
>what it
>isnt; we use context to shine light on the text. Negation is just
>another
>'harmonic' as far as the world of ~A is concerned. Science uses this a
>lot,
>especially in QM etc .. problem is that it is a bit like Plato's cave
>and so
>we have to wrestle with shadows :-)
I'll get back to the other posts in a bit, when I get some spare time,
but a passing comment:
What you are referring to here is what Aristotle called a "privative
definition": An invertebrate is an animal without a backbone, for
example. The problem with privative predicates is that there is an
indefinite number of things something is *not*. If one says, for
example, that mammals evolved from non-mammals, do we mean they evolved
from rocks? Rocks are, after all, non-mammals. Meaning cannot, without a
severe narrowing of the semantic possibility space, be privative.
--John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU> <http://www.users.bigpond.com/thewilkins/darwiniana.html> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam
=============================================================== 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 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 00:25:09 BST