<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body><div><div style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Dear FIS colleagues,<br><br>I'm curious about why the discussion about momenta matters. Does it matter because we believe it is important to determine the boundaries of specific discourses? Does that matter because we fear incoherence or confusion in our discussion if we don't demarcate boundaries? And yet the determination of discourse boundaries throws in more complexity into the debate: The coherent discourse we might hope for runs away from us as we try to grasp it.<br><br>What assumptions are we making in asserting momenta? What might it preclude? It seems to me that a moment-orientation carries a philosophical realist undertone (I'm familiar with it from Bhaskar's critical realism - this looks similar to his dialectical MELDA formulation - difficult to get into but insightful) There is an assumption about observers, and there is an assumption about natural necessity - what speculative realists call 'correlationism'. <br><br>It seems that it matters more to academics than to ordinary people that deep ontological issues should be decided upon. Science, after all, depends on continual critical questioning about nature. Yet most sensible non-academic people might prefer to have a drink with friends than hurt their brains: might they take a more pragmatic view that such matters of deep ontology are essentially undecidable? Or that their deep social (love) relationships really matter beyond everything else?<br><br>Before embarking on schematising momenta, perhaps it would be useful to think about what matters in this. Fundamentalism is an ever present risk for all academics. And additionally, information has a bearing on both matter and mattering after all...<br><br>Best wishes,<br><br>Mark<br></div></div><div dir="ltr"><hr><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">From: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><a href="mailto:ssalthe@binghamton.edu">Stanley N Salthe</a></span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">Sent: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">30/10/2015 13:24</span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">To: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><a href="mailto:55mrcs@gmail.com">Marcus Abundis</a>; <a href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">fis</a></span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">Subject: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Re: [Fis] Locality & Five Momenta . . .</span><br><br></div><div dir="ltr">
<p>Marcus wrote:</p>
<p><span>– I find myself thinking Five Momenta must represent five types of localities. I ask if that “smells right” to you. If so, I would think that “localizing hierarchies” would also be needed. For example, I see: 1) passive descriptions of Nature (aka natural philosophy, general science) as a different locality than, 2) anthropogenic or anthropocentric deeds (human semiotics+acts). One might even then add 3) biological processes mediating between 1 & 2. All represent essentially different systems of meaning, no? But then, the Five (suggested) Momenta would be subordinate to 1, 2, and 3 in different ways, as I read things. Evaluation (cataloguing) of different localized traits seems to me as a possible useful path. Thoughts?</span></p>
<p><span>Marcus -- The momenta as given my Pedro:</span><span>philosophy, biomolecular, multicellular, sociality, information </span><span>do not make up a logical hierarchy, either subsumptive nor compositional. </span>One possible, idealistic, reading is in subsumption:</p><p>{mind {microbiology {macrobiology {sociality {conceptualization}}}}}</p><p><span></span></p>
<p>STAN<br><span></span></p></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Marcus Abundis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:55mrcs@gmail.com" target="_blank">55mrcs@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir="ltr">Loet, thanks for your note (Sat Oct 24) . . . an interesting twist on things I had not been considering.<br><div><br></div><div>John, re (Tue Oct 27) “rigorous connections using the entropy concept . . . most people don't understand entropy . . . So I haven't published”</div><div>– This interests me, as my own work heads in a general “entropic” direction.</div><div><br></div><div>Pedro, Steve & Stan – re various notes on Locality, Five Momenta and Hierarchy.</div><div>– I find myself thinking Five Momenta must represent five types of localities. I ask if that “smells right” to you. If so, I would think that “localizing hierarchies” would also be needed. For example, I see: 1) passive descriptions of Nature (aka natural philosophy, general science) as a different locality than, 2) anthropogenic or anthropocentric deeds (human semiotics+acts). One might even then add 3) biological processes mediating between 1 & 2. All represent essentially different systems of meaning, no? But then, the Five (suggested) Momenta would be subordinate to 1, 2, and 3 in different ways, as I read things. Evaluation (cataloguing) of different localized traits seems to me as a possible useful path. Thoughts?</div><div><br></div><div>Re Chatin – an interesting article, to be sure, but for the reasons Joesph points out (and more) I agree with his posted thoughts.</div><div><br></div><div>Finally, in following the posted notes, I find this “discussion about discussion“ instructive.</div><table style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); line-height: 18px; font-family: proxima-nova-1,proxima-nova-2,Tahoma,Helvetica,Verdana,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; border-spacing: 0px;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td style="padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; width: auto; height: 30px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><br></td></tr><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td style="padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; width: auto; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><br></td></tr><tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><td style="padding: 0px; outline: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; border-image: none; width: auto; height: 20px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><br></td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Fis mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</body></html>