Re: complexity ontological or epistemological

["John Kineman" <***>]

Jeff,

Yes, very good examples. I think we have to retain both interpretations.

-jjk

Jeff Pridaux wrote:

>Is complexity ontological or just epistemological?
>
>This has been on my mind since the mid-90s.  Consider the following....
>
>1.  Certainly, different people can look at the same thing (Natural system)
>and see different things (formal system).  Just think of politics.  For
>instance, liberals and conservatives can look at the same issue and come up
>with completely different models of reality and push for different courses
>of action (when in many cases they both want the same end-result).
>
>2.  Certainly just because we (scientists) may interact with an entity
>(like a sub-cellular organelle) with one set of observables (like
>concentrations of molecules), doesn't mean those observables
>(concentrations) are what something else (like other subcellular
>organelles) "sees" with its interactions with the entity.   The
>concentrations may be there but the concentrations may not really be the
>observable used between the organelles.
>
>3.  It could follow that organelle B could use one set of observables when
>interacting with organelle A and organelle C could use a completely
>different set of observables when it interacts with organelle A.  The
>subcellular system could (in its own right) have complex modeling
>relationships going on independent of any human observer.  The system has
>its own interior complex modeling relationships inside it.  And as such,
>the complexity of this subcellular system could be thought of as having
>ontological existence.
>
>