Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net) wrote:
>> IAN: A definition is useful IF it puts
>> the defined in context, IF it defines
>> the relations of the defined to things
>> that are different than it. The "A=A"
>> definition of A does not do that...
> I have an even stronger standard: that the identity
> of an can be expressed as the relationship between
> X and not-X is a truism that a 12-year-old could
> understand with a bit of reflection...
IAN: Or, in other words, identity holism is
something that anyone who was under 12-years-
old or who was Hara Ra could NOT understand,
even after having several years to reflect!
I realize that, like the fallacy of free energy,
the fallacy of free identity stems from a limited
comprehension of the phenomena under investiga-
tion. The idea that energy is spontaneously
created out of nothing expresses a failure
to perceived that any energy in subset X
came from some other subset in not-X.
In the same way, any identity attribute
of subset X did not come from subset X
but from some other subset in not-X.
With the identity matrix we can see
how elementry this principle is:
1 2 3
_________
1 | 0 1 2 |
| |
2 |-1 0 1 |
| |
3 |-2 -1 0 |
-----------
The column below each entity along the
top lists the identity attributes of that
entity relative to the other entities. Note
how each entity gains 0 identity from itself.
All attributes of X are derived from not-X.
Identity, just like energy, is conserved.
********************************************************
Visit Ian W Goddard ---> http://www.erols.com/igoddard
________________________________________________________
Statements T r u t h A defines -A
a -A defines A
A: x is A b A -A
l T F A set is defined
-A: x is -A e F T by its members, thus
? ? A & -A contain each other.
--------------------------------------------------------
H O L I S M ---> http://www.erols.com/igoddard/meta.htm
________________________________________________________