Link to HomePage
A Clarification of
The Distinction of
As presented at the 6th
Annual Conference of the
WASHINGTON EVOLUTIONARY SYSTEMS SOCIETY
Conference Topic: Evolution and Semiotics
Robert M. Tufty ( rmt ) @ SensiView.com
On April 11, 1998, the popular and common conception of evolution emerged
on the political stage via a Washington Post editorial entitled,
"The Evolution Fight Evolves."
The occasion for the editorial comment was the release of a sourcebook ( 1 )
by the National Academy of Sciences, on April 9, 1998, to provide:
"good science, good history, and an intellectual framework
for teachers deep enough to keep them from panicking
when a student in class declares:
'I don't have to learn about evolution; it's against my religion'." ( 2 )
The editorial respects
a discussion of "scientifically consistent 'theories',"
verses "individually observed 'facts'," by noting that:
"a sophisticated discussion of how science works
is the only approach with a chance of dissolving
the persistent and misguided notion
that evolution and religion represent contradictory and
necessarily conflicting belief systems."
This statement portends a convergence of common and scientific terminology
towards the formalized usage that is implicit in CyberSpace.
The political issue is that when a "theory" of
carries less import than the "facts" of an individual,
science has only nominal value to the individual.
Political survival and future economic prosperity clearly depend
on a skilled labor pool of scientists and science-based technologists.
and the emerging networks of objects within CyberSpace,
allows for the direct experience of virtual realities
that span the spectrum of the senses.
Authenticity is a key issue for an autonomous object in CyberSpace,
and the distinction between realities can easily blur
as far as to become irrelevant. In such a case,
we may say that the realities a strong analogy with each other.
A strong analogy between actual reality and the virtual realities of
necessarily implies that the of strong analogy
extends to the terminology of these realities.
In turn, this allows a "reverse engineering" of the CyberSpace
to clarify the historical and popular concepts
embodied in words that are common to both realities.
A clarification of virtual realities with respect to actual realities
can only serve to strengthen the foundation
for a scientifically literate populous.
CyberSpace may be ally
a experiential reflection of the Calculus of Indications,
as expounded by G. Spencer-Brown, and commonly called the Laws of ( 3 ).
In CyberSpace, we may draw a distinction between
the of an object and the of an object,
while respecting each with equal dignity.
This paper presents a clarification to reconcile
the historical and popular concepts of and
with the mathematical and embodied by CyberSpace objects.
The distinction of
is analytically defined and analogically blurred
to establish strong analogies with several common dichotomies,
including the analytical and analogical intent of the distinction itself.
This self-referential ulation
of the distinction
allows a strong analogy to be seen between
the of the distinction and the of the Calculus of Indications.
Thus, any analogy of and
must con to the Laws of and allow
the analytic quantification of the of an object.
A review of the historical and popular concepts of
begins with the discourses of Plato and Aristotle.
The cultural impact of the mathematical consciousness
represented by the advent of al logic and syllogisms is considered.
Reflections of and are continuously seen
in everyday symbols and experiences, here and now.
The experience of clarification begins with
the distinction of an autonomous object that interacts with its reality
as embedded in CyberSpace,
and reflects some of its
within that reality of CyberSpace.
We may empathize with the functional
of a distinct, autonomous object,
and we also may empathize with the ease or complexity
of transferring to other objects
while we program, debug, and document the of the object.
Other objects may be considered as friendly or unfriendly,
depending on the ease and utility of exchanging with them.
The processing of imaginary Boolean values is discussed.
Reconciliation is achieved by recognizing
a strong conal analogy between the underlying s of Distinction
and corollaries of the clarification are discussed.
The of The Distinction
"The Laws of " ( 4 ) begins discussion of "The " with a definition that:
and that the of Distinction is to be respected as The Canonical .
Regardless of the essential definition of "continence",
the analytical concepts of equality and perfection are introduced
as necessary concepts for an autonomous object to
distinguish its from all other s within its reality.
The act of defining an equivalence, or lack thereof,
is the desired outcome of any analytical activity or analysis.
Therefore, in order to canonically extend
this quality of ulation to include ,
it is necessary to have a substantive definition of
That is to say, "What is ?"
While it would be quite presumptuous to attempt
an all encompassing answer and definition of "What is ?",
what is undeniably true is
some expectation that some definition is possible.
Thus, in a limited sense, we may say that
is that which may be defined.
In a practical sense, any analytical definition of any known
will speak of a quantified amount of a physical observable.
Thus, we take the definition of a physically observable as:
" is that which may be quantified."
Thus, the al
quality of the
is analogically extended to
and the of analytical reasoning is taken as a substantive of .
We may continue this process of analogical blurring in
an iterative manner and recursively apply this distinction of and
to other common dichotomies, including
the analytical and analogical intent of The Distinction of and itself ( see Figure 1 ).
While the essence of the dichotomies is preserved in all cases,
one group addresses conceptual matters,
another addresses matters of perception, and
the third group expresses various s of the Initials of The Calculus of Indications.
One group of strong analogies is conceptually clear in the equivalency
of the quantitative iteration that is allowed by The Law of Calling( 5 ),
i.e., "The value of a call made again is the value of the call."
The analytical and analogical dichotomy extends into
our language expressions and perceptions as
the dichotomy of "As" verses "Is".
Amusingly, this strong analogy provides a congruent example ( Figure 2 )
of the required silliness and natural stupidity associate with blurring distinctions,
in contrast to the artificial intelligence of drawing distinctions. To wit:
To show the strong analogy of
between "analogy" and "analysis", on one hand,
and "As" and "Is" on the other hand,
we attempt to recall their essence.
As we iteratively recall "essence", "essence", here
we can hear it sound like "'s'-sense".
What is this silly, mysterious "s" sense?
We can analysis the of an "s"-sense
with a string tokenizer parsing a string of symbolic tokens,
of which "S" is a delimiting token,
and consider what is left after the "S" is striped off.
For "As", we are left with the
of the indefinite article "A",
an indecisive statement with a vague sense of identity.
Thus, we rest our case for the of "Analogy As".
On the other hand, for "Is",
we are left with the of the first person singular pronoun, "I",
the decisive statement of autonomy in a spiritual sense.
Analogously, we rest our case for the of "Analysis Is".
is measured as a physical observable,
the physically observable analytical s for the s
are given conventionally given ( 6 ) as ( Figure 3 ) :
of these ulations
allows a strong analogy to be seen between
the of The Distinction of and
and The Canonical of the Calculus of Indications.
Thus, any strong analogy of
must con to the Laws of
and allow the quantification of the of an object.
As such, each object respects a Distinction of and .
Any such object that respects
with equal dignity
may be said to be autonomous and transparent.
To this point, all strong analogies have been seen either as
a physically observable or as an intellectually conceptual of Distinction,
and are, so to speak, real.
Beyond the interpretation of the "mark" of The Calculus of
as representing real "true" and "false" Boolean values
that corresponds to the existence or the non-existence
of a specific objective states ( see Figure 4 ), the Laws of
also indicate the reflection of so-called imaginary Boolean values,
which are neither "true" nor "false" in a real sense.
In CyberSpace, the substantive analysis of real and imaginary Boolean values
speaks to the concept of a system that is embedded within a meta-system.
The meta-system, in turn, provides Boolean instantiation
for logical assertions that are pered within the embedded system.
The strong analogy with
bottom-up methodologies, and
is fully developed below, under "CyberSpace Imperatives".
Historical Imperatives and Probable Doubt
From 430 to 425 BC, plague killed at least one-third the population of
In turn, the citizens of Athens lost
their fear of their Gods and Goddesses, because:
"Neither were the physicians at first of any service,
ignorant as they were of the proper way to treat it,
but they died themselves the most thickly,
as they visited the sick most often;
nor did any human art succeed any better.
Supplications in the temples, divinations, and so forth were found equally futile,
till the overwhelming nature of the disaster
at last put a stop to them altogether."( 7 )
--- Thucydides [ 428 BC ].
With the memory of the plague clearly in mind,
the city began to recover slowly and seek a better understanding
of how things worked: It was a matter of life and death!
Between 367 BC and 347 BC, Plato, as the teacher, and Aristotle, as the
alized and legitimized the and of analytical reasoning
as al logic and syllogisms.
In doing so, they realized an essential shift of consciousness
from a chaotic, mysterious universe
to an ordered, predictable reality of cause and effect.
Prior to this time, reality had a mysterious morphogenic quality
as gods walked among mortals and sired marvels of genetic engineering.
Knowledge had limited certitude and could only be based on
an analogical or empathetic perception of reality.
An analytical clarification of cause and effect was sorely needed.
Towards this end, Plato postulated a "World of Ideas", also called
the "Platonic s",
independent of any gods or goddesses.
At the time, such independence implied an absolute quality
that neither god nor goddess could change, then or forever.
Their realization of analytical reasoning for conclusive analysis
enabled the concept of objects that are independent of time.
This ability to syllogistically move beyond
the capriciousness of mysterious qualities and gods
provided the defining for western civilization.
Aristotle discussed the various categories and attributes of
in the context of quantity verses quality.
The assertion that "no single admits of varying degrees within itself"( 8 )
( Aristotle, 333 BC ), is the critical clarification of virtual certitude
that enabled al logic as an analytical tool
for interacting with physical reality.
The discourse of Plato and Aristotle represents
the first substantive clarification of the distinction of and .
Since that time of 2331 years ago, the common usage has evolved
with language and permeate our daily discourse.
Dictionary definitions of include:
"That which has mass and occupies space;
Essential nature; essence; Gist; heart;
That which is solid and practical in character;
Density; body: Air has little Substance;
Material possessions; goods; wealth: a person of Substance."( 9 )
( MicroSoft, 1992 )
Of course, there is the popular topic of " Abuse" and an official list of "Controlled s".
While the definition of
may be stated
in either very generic or specific terms,
it is generally recognized to be of great,
perhaps even cosmic and mystical, import.
On the other hand, in a al
we ulate s to con with res to unily in ourselves of what is happening.
is a noun related to the realization of the intent
of the verb "to in", which in turn,
suggests a transfer of from the external reality of an object
into the object which is being "ined".
In deference to the political issues noted above ( 2
), the author notes that
it is currently fashionable to speak of " and Style" in the popular press.
This is a crystalline example of how personal charisma and habits,
presented as "Style," is blurred with the virtual certitude of
and diminishes the of each individual.
To paraphrase the proposed course of action,
"a substantive scientific discussion of scientific
is the only approach with a chance",
in that it respects the analytical and recursive aspects of the issue.
Any less is not conal and can not stand over time.
The strong analogies with the physical organs of sensing and consciousness
are clear from the instinctual questions of
"What was heard?" and "How did it look?".
The work of Bandler and Grindler in the field of NeuroLinguistic Programming(
identify an auditory, visual and kinesthetic mode
for internally representing external ination.
The meaning of discrete sounds as words to be heard,
and the continuous vision of objects seen,
is inherent in our communications.
"To see what I said" is a signification confusion of these modes.
Finally, the kinesthetic sense of movement and non-movement
is the essence of an empathetic experience.
CyberSpace Imperatives and Virtual Certitude
CyberSpace technology has enabled an experiential reality, of mathematical s, that s a strong analogy to the Laws of , by viewing computer systems as trans ing the substantive meaning of collections of binary digits from one into another . This allows top-down, hierarchical s to exists among and within distinct objects, but also requires CyberSpace to operate as an interrupt driven, bottom-up host environment which enables the transfer and execution of among and within objects. With respect to an Object, the trans ation of between internal and external s may be visualized as ( Figure 5 ):
The trans ation is understood as mediating s of distinction and depends on a strong analogy between processing Boolean Expression and the Calculus of Indications. Specifically, each programming statement within an object is an assertion that upon execution, the intent of the statement will be realized. If the of the intent is completed with , then a true state exists and execution continues. If the of the intent is completed without , then a false state exists and execution continues. If the of the intent can not be completed, then a processing exception exists and may or may allow execution to continue.
The above example presents conceptual numeric values and operations as the that is trans ed. When this of trans ation is applied to the Laws of , we have an instance that while the real Internal and External s of the of the of Distinction are indistinguishable and may be analytically represented, the imaginary s are distinct and can not be analytically represented, but rather must be analogically experienced in a non-conceptual, or empathetic, manner, as the reality of the meta-system. The processing of exceptions s a strong analogy to the imaginary Booleans as may be seen in two examples:
Figure 6 provides the of assertion processing for an input ( read ) statement in ALGOL for a Burroughs B5000 and in SPL for a Hewlett-Packard HP-3000 computer, while Figure 7 provides the same of logical in Java for a Java Virtual Machine.
Well ed program source code will visually clarify and reflect the iterative and recursive s of the logical which the program per s. A guiding principle for the design of viable CyberSpace Objects is that the of Objects tends to clarify the of Objects when the and the are respected with equal dignity. By respecting the , we gain virtual certitude beyond time of the substantive function of the Object. By respecting the Internal of the Object, i.e., the source code, and External of the Object, i.e., the Graphic User Interface ( GUI ), we gain ease of maintenance and user-friendly interaction. More generally, the CyberSpace principles of Autonomy, Extendibility, Scalability, and Adaptability provide the following strong analogies ( Figure 8 ).
Reconciliation and Implications
The experience of clarification begins with the distinction of an autonomous object which is conscious of its reality as alternately conceptual and experiential. The conceptual reality allows analytical distinctions of to be drawn, and then blurred by an analogical confusion of s without respect for . Alternatively, the experiential reality allows the symbolic conceptualization of analytical distinctions and an empathetic experience of the distinctions. In CyberSpace, analytical distinction allow the of objects to be instantiated with , while analogical blurring allows an abstraction of to arise from distinct objects of . In turn, the abstraction of allows an autonomous object to reflect itself into its reality and thereby interact with other objects that share the reality and respect such reflections: the Netiquette of CyberSpace.
Reconciliation is achieved by recognizing that strong con al analogies of implies a convergence of popular language and CyberSpace terminology, and that the convergence will be enhanced by the direct experience of familiar, popular terms within a more precise mathematical reality. As the ancient Greek discussions of and marked a quantum jump in clarity of mathematical consciousness, prior to the advent of CyberSpace, the next most significant jump was the introduction of Arabic Digits to replace Roman Numerals.
Both Roman Numerals and Arabic Digits convey the of Iteration as enumeration. However, Roman Numerals enjoy neither an Autonomous nor an Extendible quality in their external . When the of enumeration, in the of Arabic Digits, is extended with the recursive ulation of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic, namely:
where 0 <= r < B and all are integers;
the external analytical becomes both Autonomous and Extendible. This was a profound clarification of and enabled the abstraction of algebraic operators and operands. Modern technology is impossible without this clarification.