Click here to load reader

Incommensurability and Semiotic Representation

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


How does Correspondence facilitate Represenation for Truth and Consequences?

Text of Incommensurability and Semiotic Representation

  • Out of the mouths of babes; praise is perfected Holy Bible

    Correspondence Principle and Incommensurability

    Heart/Soul | Mind/Spirit - Metaphysics A Correspondence Theory of Truth Rhetoric and Communication Design Correspondence or incommensurability Representation Theory Truth and Justification - Justice Coherent or Abhorrent

    Semiotic Communications Theory Visualization and Representation

    Modality and Representation

    Whilst semiotics is often encountered in the form of textual analysis, it also involves

    philosophical theorizing on the role of signs in the construction of reality. Semiotics

    involves studying representations and the processes involved in representational

    practices and to semioticians, 'reality' always involves representation. Daniel Chandler

    Axioms of Activity Occurrence Theory

    Semiotics, semiotic studies, or semiology is the study of signs and symbols, both

    individually and grouped into sign systems. It includes the study of how meaning is constructed and understood.

    This discipline is frequently seen as having important anthropological dimensions.

    However, some semioticians focus on the logical dimensions of the science. They

    examine areas belonging also to the natural sciences - such as how organisms make

    predictions about, and adapt to, their semiotic niche in the world (see semiosis). In

    general, semiotic theories take signs or sign systems as their object of study: the

    communication of information in living organisms is covered in biosemiotics or


    Inference and Meaning - 'Correspondence' as Axiomatic Semantics The coherence of Objective Truth to Empirical Proof is reflective of a trustworthy observer and the relevance of this truth to what philosophy terms discourse. When the Infinite transfigures its totality what will transpire this question awaits!

    Immanuel Kant

  • Is the truth or falsity of a statement determined only by how it relates to the world, and whether it accurately describes (i.e., corresponds with) that world? Truth cannot be "determined" by its correspondence with reality alone - but its representation forms a basis through which truth [as Identity] can be understood.

    Incommensurable Values First published Mon Jul 23, 2007 --- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Values, such as liberty and equality, are sometimes said to be incommensurable in the sense that their value cannot be reduced to a common measure. The possibility of value incommensurability is thought to raise deep questions about practical reason and rational choice as well as related questions concerning topics as diverse as akrasia, moral dilemmas, the plausibility of utilitarianism, and the foundations of liberalism. This entry outlines answers in the contemporary literature to these questions, starting with questions about the nature and possibility of value incommensurability. Quantum Computing

    A square Quantum Analogy Quantum Logic for Photon Detection Incommensurability between values must be distinguished from the kind of incommensurability associated with Paul Feyerabend (1978, 1981, 1993) and Thomas Kuhn (1977, 1983, 1996) in epistemology and the philosophy of science. Feyerabend and Kuhn were concerned with incommensurability between rival theories or paradigms that is, the inability to express or comprehend one conceptual scheme, such as Aristotelian physics, in terms of another, such as Newtonian physics. In contrast, contemporary inquiry into value incommensurability concerns comparisons among abstract values (such as liberty or equality) or particular bearers of value (such as a certain institution or its effects on liberty or equality). The term bearer of value is to be understood broadly. Bearers of value can be objects of potential choice (such as a career) or states of affairs that cannot be chosen (such as a beautiful sunset). Such bearers of value are valuable in virtue of the abstract value or values they instantiate or display (so, for example, an institution might be valuable in virtue of the liberty or equality that it engenders or embodies). In retrospect History provides the example of the changes that took place when the horseless carriage replaced mans noble friend the horse as a primary means of fast transportation. This same incommensurability exist where nanotechnology will replace conventional thermodynamics.

  • Ontology#1 -- (the metaphysical study of the nature of being and existence)

    From Bonjour: - Is the Coherence Theory Adequate for Truth Truth is said to consist in the agreement of knowledge with the object. According to this mere verbal definition, then, my knowledge, in order to be true, must agree with the object. Now, I can only compare the object with my knowledge by this means, namely, by taking knowledge of it. My knowledge, then, is to be verified by itself, which is far from being sufficient for truth. For as the object is external to me, and the knowledge is in me, I can only judge whether my knowledge of the object agrees with my knowledge of the object. Such a circle in explanation was called by the ancients Diallelos. And the logicians were accused of this fallacy by the skeptics, who remarked that this account of truth was as if a man before a judicial tribunal should make a statement, and appeal in support of it to a witness whom no one knows, but who defends his own credibility by saying that the man who had called him as a witness is an honorable man.[23]

    Classical definition of knowledge as: (i) Belief (ii) True (iii) Justified The "knower" has "apprehension" of being justified. This "apprehension" needs be "coherent" to "others". The purpose of "needful" justification must seemingly be itself a conceptual apprehension in that the knower comprehends that others may not necessarily see things this way. Does this represent a "coherence theory of justification"! Is such an apprehension of the given as necessarily non-conceptual and non-propositional hence [Counter-intuitive]? Is this coherence immune from error? What if the "apprehension" of what is given is not "coherent" at all? Is this the discernment of the difference between intuitive and the counter-intuitive. Do Truth and 'Correspondence' in a coherent representation become discourse. Science Perception - Reality - empirical truth; without sprit - are deemed abstract.

    What relevance does the OT requirement for testimony of "two or three witnesses" have to the ( 3) synoptic gospels?

    What distinguishes Christianity from all other religions is not its morality - Buddhism promotes moral behavior; not its longevity - Hinduism is older; but its claim that God became man and redeemed the world by his own sacrifice. This is Christianity's strongest attribute, since it can stand the test of history and historical empiricism. We can prove what

  • others only theorize, meditatively conjure, or feel. It is also Christianity's greatest vulnerability, because if one could disprove Jesus and his resurrection, one would disprove Christianity itself. If Buddha never lived, the moral principles of Buddhism would survive. If Krishna was not a manifestation of God, the philosophical ideas of Hinduism would still be entertained. But if Jesus did not live, die, and rise again immortal in his physical body, then the very basis of Christianity is destroyed. Judicial and Islamic expert Sir Norman Anderson remarked, Christianity is, truly, "the witness of history" - its original followers died not for a system of rituals or a list of behaviors, but for the empirically verified and historically preserved fact of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the apostle Paul said, "if Christ is not raised, our faith is vain and we are of all people most miserable" (1 Cor. 15:17). Emmanuel Levinas calls God the absolute other and in Otherwise than Being he uses the term the otherwise than being (Totality and Infinity. Dickens University Press 2001 pp. 34-35)

    You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free! Laws as rules of inference Justification as Purpose in meaning Despite its obvious interest and importance, however, it does not seem to me that the semantic conception of truth helps in any way to solve the problem of truth with which we are presently concerned, viz. the problem of how a true empirical belief or statement is related to the world of which it is true. The key point to be noted is that what appears on the right-hand side of an equivalence of form (T) such as is a consequence of a Tarski-type truth definition is a translation of the sentence whose truth it is intended to explicate; in fact, in the case of a meta-language which contains its object-language as a sub-component, what appears on the right is just the object-language sentence itself. Thus such equivalence seems to tell us only (i) that an object-language sentence is true if and only if its meta-language translation can be correctly asserted, i.e. is true, and (ii) what that translation is, where it may be just the sentence itself. Now (i) seems only to represent a necessary, though clearly not a sufficient, condition of adequacy for a translation; (ii) on the other hand conveys an important relation between the two languages. But it is hard to see that either (i) or (ii) says anything about the nature