subject-object boundary in mathematics

[Steve Johnson <***>]

Howard,

 

According to the Pauli quote you mentioned the epistemic cut lies somewhere along the line between the observing mind and the system being observed. Where is it located in case of the mathematics, where the observed system and the observer are both "inside" the subject? Or is the mathematician's mind split into an object and subject?

 

-Steve

 

W. Pauli: "The concept of consciousness in fact demands a cut between subject and object, the existence of which is a logical necessity, while the position of the cut is to a certain extent arbitrary".

HP: This necessity for placing a cut between the model itself and what is
being modeled has nothing to do with he scope or time frame of what is
being modeled. Whatever system you are modeling requires that the model is
not identical with the system itself, but a model of the system. Complex
systems require more than one model, but the models must still be separate
from whatever is being modeled.

 

HP: I don't see any alternative. The position of the cut is all that is
arbitrary. You have not shown how the concept of "model" can evade the
modeling relation as Rosen represents it.

Howard Pattee <***> wrote:

> At 02:14 PM 12/10/04 -0500, Dan wrote:
> >Howard,
> >
> >This is all well and good for a formal system and for a
> >static model. But I think if you try to extend it to into the
> >material realm and a continuous and changing modeling
> >process, this view itself needs a complement.
>
> HP: This necessity for placing a cut between the model itself and what is 
> being modeled has nothing to do with he scope or time frame of what is 
> being modeled. Whatever system you are modeling requires that the model is 
> not identical with the system itself, but a model of the system. Complex 
> systems require more than one model, but the models must still be separate 
> from whatever is being modeled .
>
> >Dan: When we consider that the observer only
> >can observe with aid of a continuous stream of energy
> >and material from the environment
>  (air, water, food, etc.)
> >- including likely interactions with the objectified system
> >he/she observes so the object system and observer's life
> >support cannot be disentangled - and that also a continual
> >stream of energy and materials that have been altered in
> >quality, quantity and configuration (waste and other
> >products, impacts), it seems to me that the epistemic cut is
> >fully bridged, or healed.
>
> HP: In this example you are only moving the cut so as to include more of 
> the ecosystem. Your model is now about a much bigger system that will 
> require many more measurements (encodings), but the larger model will still 
> be separated from the system by these encodings. All you have 'healed" is 
> the previous cut made for the simpler system.
>
> >Dan: So not only is the location of the cut arbitrary, but I think
> >the cut itself is arbitrary or a choice too when one considers
> >that there is an
>  alternative.
>
> HP: I don't see any alternative. The position of the cut is all that is 
> arbitrary. You have not shown how the concept of "model" can evade the 
> modeling relation as Rosen represents it.
>
> Howard

---

Do you Yahoo!?
 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.