|
I think this is an interesting situation-- it is also an
opportunity to show how a relational model would apply:
Howard Pattee wrote: For example, is it entirely nonsensical to believe
that in the universe acceleration is more important than velocity, as is clear
from our models?
What is acceleration without any value of velocity? What are either
of these values without some notion of time? Acceleration of "what", "where?"...
It appears we need some value of space as well. None of these things can exist
without one another. In some sense, then, they entail each other and are
entailed, at the same time. In no way can acceleration be said to be a "more
important" value than any of the others in any model that is congruent to
natural systems in the universe. The relations between all these entities will
generate causal effects in the natural system, therefore the relations need to
be included in the model, just as the fact that isolation of these entities from
each other is impossible in the natural system must be included in the
model.
As for judging the importance of one aspect over any of the others,
that is a matter of perspective, and perspective is relative,
too.
Judith
|