Re: Anyone up to a Rosennean challenge?

[James N Rose <***>]

Hi Judith,

I haven't been doing much writing in quite a while but would
like to step from my hibernation to get in this conversation
if it's alright.

> Judith Rosen wrote:
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> One of my father's main tenets was that the physics-based models don't
> accurately describe even the systems they were created to describe. 

Sometimes, minds and thoughts are constrained to the experiences 
they have had and the patterns they inure to.  The concept beneath
your 'challenge' asks the question of whether your father's insights
are up to the task of besting the existing criteria of science ..
the capacity to extrapolate and predict .. to specify an example in
event-space that was unconsidered before .. or not.

He confronted the weaknesses and deficiencies of 'modeling science'
but can his ideas not just stand as anarchy, but be even-handed
and even-minded enough to laud and surpass 'modeling science's 
best notable quality: .. the capacity to predict ..? 

And then more recently, you ask if its possible to find words within
the exiting languaging of science, to get the job done.

:-)

Quite an effort .. on all counts.

But what is it you want to achieve?  To find an alternative way to 
phrase entailment and relational causality into conventional vernacular?
Would that help Rosennean complexity achieve acceptibility? Or do
you see something that your Dad didn't appreciate about his own work?

To stand on a mountain peak and talk about a far reality that
friends waiting in the valley beneath can't see, let alone 
verbalize is one thing.  To additionally chart a path through
the novel territory so that everyone can arrive at that
far place together and appreciate the wholeness of not
just the original vision, but to live and know the reality/ies of 
getting around and among the perceptions, back and forth, and
bathe in the appreciation of all the views and each of their
respective values and realities .. is something else.

Does a system, any system .. in its most pure nascent stages .. 
'know' its eventual capacities?  Is a seed privy to the achievement
'tree-hood' .. or hold within itself the eventual quality of what
it is to behave as a tree in a windstorm or within an ecology?

Does a pen .. in the words of a modern songtress from India ..
'Know what is exciting, what is writing, on a page?"?

Can a predicative science statement be generated from the
observed notion of a process at once identifiable as 'entailment'?

:-)

RR took a class-vision, a paradigm of percepts, and identified new
aspects, alternate aspects.  The importance of those aspects can't 
be diminished because they didn't conform to the testing criteria
of the previous standards that were/are in use and which remain
in juxtaposition to his new-thoughts.

But if you want to say he had the seeds of paradigms coordination
in his writings, and that you will give them voice, then you have 
to show he knew that his system had that eventual/inventive capacity
and that he was moving there himself.

If you can't then you just might have to admit that a piece
of the puzzle eluded even RR at his highest genius.  Again, not
detracting his achievement, but using his very own standards
to show a country yet awaiting fulfillment.

Any word - voiced - , any notion - expressed - , precludes the scope
of possibilities that existed in the image of possibilities that
were/are present in the time -before- instantiation and coming-into-being.

Once you 'prove' and bring into existence a child from noosperm cells
conjoining, how do you 'predict' all the other lives and personalities
that were precluded by that one life 'becoming'?

Yet you know - from hard scientific realism - that the scope of that
option-space, that all those other persons/personalities were/are
part of the 'natural holistic and vast' system of being that RR
and others now appreciate as the true 'complexity' of being.

So the goal's scope of predictiveness needs a re-directed shape, Judith.
You have to think in new directions and new qualia and new criteria.

The nature of prediction has to mature and morph.  If the grand scale of 
holism is to be handled -- to the point of being all inclusive even
of old-form models now out of vogue -- then you have to image a whole
different class of predictions.  Ones that fit RR's standards.  :-)

Jamie