No Identity Boundary

From: Ian Goddard (igoddard@erols.com)
Date: Wed Mar 04 1998 - 04:49:18 MST


Mark Crosby (crosby_m@rocketmail.com) wrote:

>> Reilly Jones (Reilly@compuserve.com) wrote:

>>> There really is something that gives coherency to
>>> the subjective "I" and that something constructs a
>>> boundary between one quark or bit of substance and
>>> the quark immediately next to it.

>> IAN: What is this "something."

>I doubt that the "subjective 'I'" is bounded at the
>quark level <sneeze - oops, there goes part of
>myself!> In any case, this "something" is called
>organizational or semantic closure (cf. anything on
>autopoiesis).

  IAN: Semantic closure, yes, in that the
  boundary of identity is merely a product
  of semantics, of words, of utility, and
  as such is ultimately an illusion. No
  question that placing limits on identity
  is useful in the process of communication.
  But my effort is to map the reality beyond
  the words we impose on things, and I believe
  that that reality is what the "mystics" speak
  of: a unified and holistic identity unbounded
  by the illusory and self-serving categories
  that the mind imposes on reality. We become
  so attached to our categories, they become
  more real than the reality we impose them
  upon, to a large extent because the mind
  IS the process of categorizing and thus
  IS those categories. To see that which
  lies beyond the mind, its words and
  categories, is to see the truth.

  I believe that this truth is as logical
  as the system of categories we impose
  on the universe; in fact, I think that
  the underlying holistic reality, even as
  it tends by its very nature to defy logic,
  is, once we can grasp it, more logical than
  the system of categories we impose on it.

  As to "autopoiesis," which I guess would be
  loosely defined as a system that is self-de-
  fining, even that is an expression of holistic
  identity. When we define a region of space as A,
  we simultaneously define a region of space that
  is not-A. We know what A is and define it as such
  only because and only if we also know what it is
  not. So even the most sharply defined category
  confirms holistic identity, and thus holistic
  identity is always true, and atomism is never
  true, but always assumed, always semantics.

  It's probable that because holism is always
  true, and thus there is no not-holism, that
  that is exactly why holism is nearly imposs-
  ible to grasp... by its own rule it disappears
  and defies perfect description. Holism defies
  the perfect perception of holism because of
  holism. It must therefore keep breaking down
  into parts, into atoms, into entities, into +
  and - , into universes, into us. But if we add
  up all the parts and map the structure of their
  identities, we can see the self-hiding holistic
  reality and map the structure of absolute truth.

  A CONTRADICTION? NO!

  One might say that if holism asserts that A is
  true if and only if A and not-A, and if holism
  is 100% true such that there is no not-holism,
  then holism contradicts itself. How can holism
  survive this apparent contradiction? By the
  logical necessity that the holistic reality is
  zero. If there is 1 there is -1 (ad infinitum),
  and the holistic sum is zero:

        0 = (...-1 <---0---> +1...) = 0

  The number system describes the absolute truth.
  So there is 100% 0, since the sum of all entities
  (which defines "the whole") equals zero. Zero keeps
  breaking into +1 and -1, which are "not-zero" and
  yet also zero. So zero is zero and not-zero, the
  whole is whole and not-whole, which means the
  whole is the whole and yet is also composed
  of parts. In this way, holism (A=~A) is
  always true since atomism is holism.

**************************************************************
VISIT Ian Williams Goddard ---> http://www.erols.com/igoddard
______________________________________________________________
 IDENTITY MATRIX | I D E N T I T Y C O N S E R V A T I O N
-----------------| The basis of logic is identity (ID). The
     1 2 3 | basis of ID is difference. Degrees of dif-
    _________ | ference can be quantified as ID units. The
 1 | 0 1 2 | | ID Matrix shows the ID units of three num-
   | | | bers, and may do so unto infinity. The ID
 2 |-1 0 1 | | units of each number are derived from the
   | | | others, and therefore ID is holistic not
 3 |-2 -1 0 | | atomistic. As the sum of all ID units unto
   ----------- | infinity equals 0, identity is conserved.
_________________|____________________________________________

GODDARD'S METAPHYSICS-> http://www.erols.com/igoddard/meta.htm
______________________________________________________________

D I S T R U S T A U T H O R I T Y



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:41 MST