Re: Qualitative vs. Quantitative Object Context Change & Dialectics

From: Universe (universe_at_tAkEcovadOuT.net)
Date: 01/30/04 

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:42:42 -0500

"Universe" <universe@tAkEcovadOuT.net> wrote in message
news:9b2a2$400e0be5$97cff003$16382@msgid.meganewsservers.com...
> "Universe" <universe@tAkEcovadOuT.net> wrote in message
> news:7a03d$400ddfbc$97cff003
>
> > *Strategically* (vs. tactically) Don't Combine 2 Basic Oppositions
> Into 1!
> > *Strategically* Split 1 (seeming unity of opposites) into 2 (poles)!
>
> A dialectic is where 2 opposing objects form a union. Often a
> dialectic is found to constitute or motor the essence of another
> object. It is the interaction of the opposite objects in a specific
> set of conditions - a specific context - that gives the object they
> are the center of its contextual features and characteristics. When
> there is great enough change of the context the object the dialectic
> lives in, the nature of the interaction of the dialectic's 2 opposites
> typically changes enough to cause a qualitative change in the features
> and characteristics of the object the dialectic drives.
>
> Key aspects of a dialectic that cause change when the context of their
> object changes are:
> ~ the manner in which the 2 opposites interpenetrate one another
> [crudely just as each side of the I Ching symbol has a
> circle within it of the opposite color
> ~ the manner and conditions whereby the opposites undergo
> mathematical like identity; i.e. how and
> given what contexts the opposites switch, or exchange role
> responsibilities
> a) at any instant they may exchange from 1 to all
> roles
> b) key roles for the opposites are:
> 1) which plays the leading role
> 2) which plays the engaging role
> 3) which plays the parametrizing
> (constraining) role
> c) the Leading<=>Parametric is a significant role
> responsibility opposition
> d) the Engaging<=>Parametric is a significant role
> responsibility opposition
> ~ the manner and conditions which cause the opposites to come into
> overall conflict
> ~ the manner and conditions which cause the opposites to have
> overall unity or peace between them
> ~ the manner and conditions which cause one opposite to overcome
> and eat the other opposite
> a) this may lead to a new dialectic with totally new
> opposites
> b) this may lead to a new dialectic where the
> victorious opposite forms a new
> dialectic with some other opposite
> ~ the manner and conditions whereby the object the dialectic
> resides in becomes its opposite in
> terms of its nature, features and characteristics
> ~ the manner and conditions which cause the dialectic to generate
> small quantitative changes in the
> nature, features and characteristics of the object in
> which it resides
> ~ the manner and conditions which cause the dialectic to generate
> large qualitative changes in the
> nature, features and characteristics of the object in
> which it resides
>
> Elliott
> --
> The thing is that as I showed in the excerpt of a mathematician, the
> mathematicians don't think Integer "is a" Real. A Real has *more* to
> it than an Integer to begin with. A Real has both an Integer AND
> decimal part. Why would any right thinking mathematician think that
> something less *is-a* something more?
>
>

Relevant Pages