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

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



Sounds restrictive (as in you text below).
Would you exclude the 'impredicativity' (as I understand the word) of unlimited natural systems with unlimited qualia?
Are all the unknowables oredicative?
as per your quote [EL p. 39] I agree, in formal models there are hiatuses by the limitations of the observed features only, leaving impredicative aspects open, but to restrict the term to these ONLY? (Then again I am not sure about the "such" in it.)
 
John M
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Gwinn
To: ***
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: The difference between "Causal" and "Impredicative" loops, etc.

I'm glad you brought that up, Judith. I recall there was some confusion on the old list whether RR applied 'impredicative' to formal models only, or also to natural systems. And some of the phrasing in Essays adds to the confusion. For example:
    "I claim that, as material systems, organisms are full of such impredicativities." [EL p. 39]
It makes sense to me that 'impredicativity' is intended to apply to formal models only. I imagine that in the above quote he meant that the models of organisms are full of such impredicativities. And that it appears in the shorter form because for him all epistemology occurs via the modeling relation [EL p. 324] -- to understand organisms (or any other natural system) is to understand them via their models. So 'the models of' phrase is implicit.
 
How does that sound?
 
Regards,
Tim