[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

Re: The difference between "Causal" and "Impredicative" loops, etc.



Dear Judith,
I did not have to go to the July ISSS to be confused, as you put it
(continue after the quote from your post):
----------------------------
----- Original Message -----
To: ***
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 8:06 AM
Subject: The difference between "Causal" and "Impredicative" loops, etc.

One of the areas of confusion I'm seeing in many different settings, including the ISSS conference I attended in July, is caused by a difference my father specified in his use of the phrases "Causal loops" and "Impredicative loops". The ideas are connected because they both describe chains of entailment, which is why it gets confusing, but "Causal loops" exist in natural complex systems whereas "Impredicative loops" exist in formalisms (i.e., models).
(SKIP)
Judit
---------------------
Does that mean that "Causal loops" as I guess, - the unlimited term for natural systems (unlimited) - are IMPREDICATIVE, while the "Impredicative loops" as designated to limited models - are called impredicative, because only those are registered which are within the model-boundaries? Did RR want to draw the attention to the incompleteness of the named select causality of the models by pointing out that - indded - they are impredicative (unlimited)?  
 
During the past years I drew appreciation from Rosen-friendly minds several times (and lists) when explaining that "a cause" is a reduced model view, where the total interconnectedness and its unlimited source-effects are cut off in favor of the selected ONE - pointed out by the appropriate model-view.
In this sense the real sense of 'impredicativity' SHOULD apply to formalism.
 
John M