ONT Re: Aristotle's Approximation
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Douglas McDavid wrote:
>
> Jon --
>
> I almost wrote this in response to your previous post,
> but now I will quickly weigh in on constancy of mental
> affection. In my opinion, Aristotle got this dead wrong.
Yes, Sue and I also questioned assumption in our papers, because
it seems clear that our applications to education and technology,
culture and society require us to to leave open the possibilities
of real development and true diversity in and among the agents of
interpretation. Given the burgeoning complexity of sign relations
in the general case -- "Of triadic Being the multitude of forms is
so terrific that I have usually shrunk from the task of enumerating
them" said Peirce -- it was probably wise of Aristotle to start out
in something like this way, but that was yesterday, and we imagine
ourselves to be big kids now. However, I am now in the middle of
re-examining this whole question, so stay tuned to this channel.
> In fact, I would say that with respect to the same object, or external sign,
> each observation, even by the same person, will render a different mental
> affection, however slightly or subtly variant. This is why I proposed
> in all seriousness my suggestion of irreducible octadicity some weeks
> ago on the SUO list. Situational and purposeful factors have as
> much to do with the relationship between the observed and its
> mental representation as does the observed itself.
>
> I can't resist a reference to the changed mental affection I have to the
> whole range of air travel semeia, not to mention the New York skyline,
> and a whole range of other stimulations vis a vis the otherwise
> identical stimulations two weeks ago.
I was driving to the store yesterday when I saw a billboard with a big red heart shape,
inscribed with nothing more than the letters "NY", "DC", PA". Two weeks ago I would
have had a semiotic reaction of vague incomprehension, but yesterday I had distinct
images go through my mind and experienced an affective impression that I can only
decribe as acute incomprehension at the whole turn of events that they signified.
The old 3-tuple of the form <o, s, i> is still in my memory,
but now a new one, an utterly sickening form of development,
has been added to my store of pathemata, overriding the old.
> I'm only sending this to you, because Arisbe rejects my postings,
> not because I have any desire to keep this private.
Yes, unlike SUO, Arisbe requires a sign-up, but the archive is down right now.
The ONT list has been a relatively peaceful place to talk out long term goals,
without all that reverberant volume of screaming about too much volume.
Info On Other Lists:
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Arisbe (if it's working)
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/arisbe
http://stderr.org/pipermail/arisbe/
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Ontology Sublist of the IEEE Standard Upper Ontology (SUO) Forum
http://suo.ieee.org <<<---<<< Subscription Info
http://suo.ieee.org/refs.html
http://suo.ieee.org/links.html
http://suo.ieee.org/email
http://suo.ieee.org/ontology <<<---<<< ONT Archive
http://suo.ieee.org/suo-ce
http://suo.ieee.org/suo-kif
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Organization, Complexity, Autonomy (OCA) List
Contact John Collier:
Dr John Collier ag659@ncf.ca
Box 209 fax: +61 2 4921 6928
Carp, Ontario, CANADA K0A 1L0
http://www.newcastle.edu.au/department/pl/Staff/JohnCollier/
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤