Re: Causality vs. Entailment

[Jerry Zhu <***>]

Judith,

I will answer your questions where they are.

[ Jerry Zhu]
> I would like to add that entailment is about
ontology
> while causality is about epistemology. These two are
> often not differentiated.  Eighter ontology is
> ignored or treating ontology as epistemology.

[Judith]
Entailment drives both ontology of systems and system 
> epistemology, but causality has to do with what
> actually happens; the observables. So, entailment
can be said to provide the "ontology" of 
> system behavior. I don't recall ever hearing or
> reading my father's words to that effect, but it
sounds right. He usually kept ontological issues
separate from epistemological issues, but that may
have been to avoid confusing people more than he
already had to!

[Jerry]

To me, your characterization of entailment is more
about the concept of ontology, and your
characterization of epistemology is more about the
concept of epistemology. Ontology is basic statement
about reality and can not be proved right or wrong. 
It is time symmetric or timeless.  There is a
plurality of ontologies.  Epistemology considers what
to stand upon for understanding. It gives definitions
through formulars that can be proved right or wrong. 

Entailment seems to have different meaning from
ontology.  If you define entailment that way I would
not disagree.  I'd prefer the distinquision radically
between the two and then connect the two in form of
methodogy.  Ontology precedes epistemology and
determines methodology to formulate epistemology that
is deduction.  Methodology also includes the
formulation of ontology that is induction.
 
[Judith]

> The tricky part of this is that reproduction as it
> happens in all species is part of causality
(observable behaviors) and yet is often 
> seen as a form of ontology. On the other hand, how
> complex systems self-organize in the first place is
the ontology he referred to and differentiated from
epistemology. It was the ontology of the 
> organization type, itself, not specific cases as
> with individual systems or species.
> 
[jerry]

Causality breaks time symmetry.  the cause precedes
the effect in time.  Physical laws are timeless.  It
is the observation of the observer who breaks the time
symmetry, hense cause and effect. Epistemology answers
why, where, how questions, while ontology answers what
questions.

Ontology is organization types, identity, and
patterns.  Anything related to time belongs to
epistemological issues.

> JZ: Autopoiesis theory differentiates organization
> from structure.  The former determines the identity
the latter the behavior.  We all have the same
identity
> that is human but we are structurally different. 
> The organization determines the range of behaviors
and the structure determines the actual behavior of
> particular individule.

[Judith]
> Can you be more specific in defining what
"structure" is in your view and how it differs from
organization? Because in the Rosennean view, structure
refers to pysical/material parts, as in "the
physical/material aspects of overall organization".
Organization  includes components which are not
material; relations, for example. So, the Rosennean
view is that organization determines both identity and
behavior, in general. Material structure may account
only for differences between various species and
differences between various individuals within a
species. So I need to know how you define your terms.

[Jerry]
To know the terms of autopoiesis such as structure and
organization see the site:

http://www.enolagaia.com/EA.html#S

I basically agree with your explanation on
organization and structure except behavior.

According M/V, structural determinism means that it is
the structure of the organization that determines the
actual behavior.  I run slower than I did twenty years
ago because I change structurally but not
organizationally since I am still who I was twenty
years ago.

> JZ: Today's business changes are mostly
> structural not orgnaizational.  I don't believe that
> there is even awareness on this.  A change in
> orgnaization or identity revolutionizes the
> performance in differently levels of magnitute.  See
> the difference the speed between a turtle and a
> rabit.
>  They are all made of the same six atoms.  But the
> organization of the atoms determines the identity,
> therefore the performance level.

[judith]
> I see what you are getting at, but the final analogy
> lost me. A turtle  and a rabbit are both living
systems. They have the same  organizational type but a
different material structure. What they are 
> made out of, in terms of atoms, doesn't really enter
> into it because that is "pre-organizational"
information which can be utterly changed by the
organization, itself.  So I would reverse
> your entailments there, but I still can agree with
your final sentence. In fact, the  way I'm
interpreting it, performance is a behavior... I would
need a more concrete definition of "performance
level". There may be an inconsistency with what you
said in the first paragraph.

[jerry]
A turtle and a rabbit are different species hence have
different identities.  They are organizationall
distinct albeit they are made of the same atoms as we
humans.  

I add that organization determines the range of
behavor and structure determines actual behavior of
individuals.  The range of behavor of the speed of a
turtle (the performance level, I refer the race
between a turtle and a rabbit) is different from that
of a rabbit since they are organizationally distinct.

[Judith]
> In any case, the Rosennean notion is that
> organization determinines 
> both the GENERAL behavior and identity--

{jerry] I agree here.

{judith]
>which are similar (they are both living systems with
the behaviors and identity typical of all 
> living systems). The material structure (in part or
> in total, I don't know) accounts for the specific
differences (in behavior and identity) 
> between these two living systems.

[Jerry]

Turtle and rabbit are different in organizations. A
turtle has a hard shell while a rabbit has not. So
they are different in organization or identity or
type.

Structure represents relations between parts as well
as material implementations that change from moment to
moment. Therefore the actual behavoir change along
with structural change.

Regards


Jerry

 



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250