East Meets West Logic...

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Grim Reaper:



(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1M9VijaAA0)

[Lloyd Gillespie]

On The Constitution of Habits to Concepts, and Cognition of The World...

Habits and Interpretation: defending the pragmatist maxim Christopher Hookway
Pierce's Self-Corrective Thesis_An Analytic Truth H.S. CHAN

"Three elements go to make up an idea. The first is its intrinsic quality as a feeling. The second is the energy with which it affects other ideas, an energy which is infinite in the here-and-nowness of immediate sensation, finite and relative in the recency of the past. The third element is the tendency of an idea to bring along other ideas with it" (CP 1.135).

And:
"Symbols grow. They come into being by development out of other signs, particularly from icons, or from mixed signs partaking of the nature of icons and symbols. We think only in signs. These mental signs are of mixed nature; the symbol-parts of them are called concepts. If a man makes a new symbol, it is by thoughts involving concepts. So it is only out of symbols that a new symbol can grow. Omne symbolum de symbolo. A symbol, once in being, spreads among the people. In use and in experience, its meaning grows." (CP 2.302)

The hyperbolic philosophy as a general principle of development...

Peirce writes:
"This theory is that the evolution of the world is hyperbolic, that is, proceeds from one state of things in the infinite past, to a different state of things in the infinite future. The state of things in the infinite past is chaos, tohu bohu, the nothingness of which consists in the total absence of regularity. The state of things in the infinite future is death, the nothingness of which consists in the complete triumph of law and absence of all spontaneity. Between these, we have on our side a state of things in which there is some absolute spontaneity counter to all law, and some degree of conformity to law, which is constantly on the increase owing to the growth of habit. The tendency to form habits or tendency to generalize, is something which grows by its own action, by the habit of taking habits itself growing. Its first germs arose from pure chance. There were slight tendencies to obey rules that had been followed, and these tendencies were rules which were more and more obeyed by their own action. There were also slight tendencies to do otherwise than previously, and these destroyed themselves. To be sure, they would sometimes be strengthened by the opposite tendency, but the stronger they became the more they would tend to destroy themselves. As to the part of time on the further side of eternity which leads back from the infinite future to the infinite past, it evidently proceeds by contraries." (CP 8.31

"So that it is wrong to say that a good language is important to good thought, merely; for it is of the essence of it. Next would come the consideration of the increasing value of precision of thought as it advances. Thirdly, the progress of science cannot go far except by collaboration; or, to speak more accurately, no mind can take one step without the aid of other minds. Fourthly, the health of the scientific communion requires the most absolute mental freedom. […] At the same time, a general agreement concerning the use of terms and of notations--not too rigid, yet prevailing, with most of the co-workers in regard to most of the symbols, to such a degree that there shall be some small number of different systems of expression that have to be mastered--is indispensable. Consequently, since this is not to be brought about by arbitrary dictation, it must be brought about by the power of rational principles over the conduct of men." (CP 2.219)

We have to remember that Peirce’s semiotic is not anthropocentric; it is a theory that accepts the existence of signs outside and independent of the human mind. In the following quotes Peirce stresses the fact that the use of someone or upon a person is used to make the broader conception of his semiotics easier understood. "I define a Sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called its Object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its Interpretant, that the latter is thereby mediately determined by the former. My insertion of "upon a person" is a sop to Cerberus, because I despair of making my own broader conception understood." (A Letter to Lady Welby, SS 80-81, 190 And further: "For the purposes of this inquiry a Sign may be defined as a Medium for the communication of a Form. It is not logically necessary that anything possessing consciousness. that is, feeling of the peculiar common quality of all our feeling should be concerned. But it is necessary that there should be two, if not three quasi-minds, meaning things capable of varied determination as to forms of the kind communicated." (On Signs, MS 793:1, not dated)

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Foundations for Reasoning in Cognition-Based Computational Representations of Human Decision Making...

Sandia National Laboratories...[2001]

Abstract
In exploring the question of how humans reason in ambiguous situations or in the absence of complete information, we stumbled onto a body of knowledge that addresses issues beyond the original scope of our effort. We have begun to understand the importance that philosophy, in particular the work of C. S. Peirce, plays in developing models of human cognition and of information theory in general. We have a foundation that can serve as a basis for further studies in cognition and decision making. Peircean philosophy provides a foundation for understanding human reasoning and capturing behavioral characteristics of decision makers due to cultural, physiological, and psychological effects. The present paper describes this philosophical approach to understanding the underpinnings of human reasoning. We present the work of C. S. Peirce, and define sets of fundamental reasoning behavior that would be captured in the mathematical constructs of these newer technologies and would be able to interact in an agent type framework. Further, we propose the adoption of a hybrid reasoning model based on his work for future computational representations or emulations of human cognition.

Induction Review
Induction is where we generalize from a number of cases of which something is
true, and infer that the same thing is true of a whole class [Peirce 1878].
Induction is the reasoning function that draws rules from the results of sample cases. As such, it satisfies two functions in a cognitive model: it provides a validation mechanism for a hypothesis assertion, and it provides the foundations for learning or knowledge capture in the cognition process. Induction is a statistical construct that may not be fixed over an infinite time horizon, and is invalid when based on a single event. It can be likened to the problem of drawing a straight line through a single point; there is an infinite set of solutions. Another interesting characterization of induction is that it can be used to define empirical laws but in isolation cannot determine theoretical laws. Peirce, who has been characterized as a “statistical frequentist,” believed that all empirical reasoning is a process of making inferences from samples about a population. Induction is justified under the “law of large numbers,” we don’t know the real probability due to our finite perspective, but because of the large number of cases, we are able to approximate the actual probability.

A large volume of work exists in the search for the ultimate technology to perform inductive learning. An excellent reference is the paper by M. A. Wani (2001) who compares a number of technologies that perform this inductive learning function. Basically, the effort involves the processing of large volumes of information in order to extract rules and/or concepts concerning the information. The objective is to then use the rules in decision algorithms. An interesting side study was that of Fogel, et. al. (1999) in which they used an induction model to explore the dynamic behavior of a number of agents in a postulated economic environment. Their study explored the impact of deterministic learning rules versus statistically based rules that might be an indicator of the effects of Lefebvre’s work (discussed later).

http://www.dodccrp.org/events/10th_ICCRTS/CD/presentations/150.pdf

[Lloyd Gillespie]

BAYESIAN INDUCTIVE LOGIC, inductive predictions from statistical hypotheses... by Johannes Wilhelmus Romeijn

Introduction...

“You will reply that reality has not the least obligation to be interesting. And I will answer you that reality may avoid this obligation, but that hypotheses may not.” – J.L. Borges in Death and the Compass

Inductive Inference.
This thesis concerns inductive inferences, that is, inferences running from given observations to as yet unknown observations and general observational statements. Inductive inferences are almost everywhere, and come so naturally to us that they easily escape philosophical attention. We drink water because it has always refreshed us, we stride forward confidently because the earth has always attracted and carried us, and we give way to sleep because we have always woken up to renewed presence. In all these cases, the trust that we put in the stability of a pattern can be seen as a trust in the inherent inductive inference. A bit further removed from the backbone of life, these inferences perhaps become more easily recognisable. If the post has been delivered every morning until now, we expect it to be delivered on future mornings too, but if delivery is late on Saturday and Sunday, it will not take long before we only expect it in the morning on weekdays. Here again, the trust in the stability of the pattern is eventually a trust in an inductive inference.

The basic assumption of inductive inferences is that the world is a boring place, and that the same pattern in the observations will keep repeating itself. Usually the sameness is taken as the result of some structure in the world, which is supposed to underpin the patterns in the observations. Fortunately, the world is boring in a rather interesting way. Many observations show patterns that are occasionally violated. For example, it may be that of two equally expensive stalls at the market the fruit of one is usually better than that of the other. But this need not be the case every week. These so-called weak patterns suggest that the world contains a certain structure, but that this structure is perturbed by other structures or effects, which may be deemed noise for the occasion. The one merchant may be better in spotting good fruit at the auctions than the other, but the trade at such auctions always contains an element of chance. Nevertheless we may come to know that the fruit of the one stall is usually better than that of the other. So inductive practice is able to pick up on weak patterns as well.

Inductive inferences are abundant in daily life, and no less so in the daily life of scientists. Much of experimental science concerns the identification of, possibly weak, patterns in the observations. The interdependence between electrodynamic and magnetic forces is an example of a strong, exceptionless pattern. The correlation between vaccination and disease in a population of cows exemplifies a weak pattern, because it only shows in large herds. In general, in experimental science there is a basic trust in the stability of specific patterns, and the typical activity of theoretical science is to motivate this trust by providing a picture or story on the structure behind the stable patterns. Of course, the discussion on structures may get far removed from the observations, but this must not distract from the original intention of experimental science to select stable patterns, and to strip them of noise.

Logical empiricist framework.

Let me make the general perspective of this thesis precise. First, as indicated in the foregoing, it is concerned with inductive inference and the problem of induction. But in this context it has a specific aim, and it assumes a particular framework and a particular position therein. As for the aim, it is strictly normative. Inductive practice is only briefly discussed, and only to contrast practice with the norms that this thesis is concerned with. As for the framework, it is that of logical empiricism, as represented by Reichenbach (1935) and most notably Carnap (1950, 1952). In this framework, observations are considered to be clear-cut packages of information, which may be expressed in a formal observation language. Further, inductive inferences are cast in the form of probability judgements over this language. And finally, the inductive inferences are primarily concerned with predictions of single observations. On these three points, the present thesis adopts the framework of Carnap.

(This is a brief description of a PhD graduate thesis, that won the author highest honors, for breaking this new ground in inductive logic...)

[labelwench]

Of interest to me in dealing with dogs and horses, is the method of their reasoning processes, that my interactions with these species might achieve the results desired by my interactions with them. Of particular interest, is one difference which I observe to be consistently different between them, and which may be related to the fact that one is a predator and the other prey species.

Canines establish their hierarchy and once established, the need for further testing does not seem to be required unless there is a major change in circumstances, as in the introduction of a new individual into the group, or one of the females comes into season etc., at which time the established order becomes temporarily unbalanced and the exercise is repeated.

Horses will test everything, every day, and though they also have a herd hierarchy, they do this without fail amongst the individual animals that I have had opportunity to observe over many years.

Dogs are quite forgiving of the inconsistencies which humans display.

Horses expect, and even demand, consistency, if we hope to have a relationship of trust with them.

....the trust that we put in the stability of a pattern can be seen as a trust in the inherent inductive inference.
Originally posted by Lloyd Gillespie

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?(a few re-posts to get my balance...)

Lorrina, imo, there are no local problems, as the international law problems control all the local problems, to be the local problems they are; therefore, all I offer, and recommend, is the international solutions I absolutely know are necessary__First... I've listed a few below, of the thousands listed in my newest Heinz #57 capitalisms' notes...

The #1 law of solutions - All world problems can be solved by respecting the natural universal law of balance...!

Universal justice will be found in the internal balances of all autonomous nations. If all nations balance their internal affairs, they will be automatically balanced externally. This can be accomplished by the separation of supply and demand, into two competing supply and demand markets, internally!

An economic, universal justice system of supply and demand computerized databases, based on Boolean logic and sliding time scale law structures, with dynamic pricing balances, can be built and implemented world wide, to solve our over-pressing problems!

We have the ability to computerize capitalism into balance, solve our problems, and honor the entirety of human yearnings.

We have the technology and ability to computerize suzeraintic capitalism into honest government and finance.

The Heinz-57 capitalisms and the Heinz-57 totalitarianisms can be computerized into incorruptible and honest capitalism.

We must computerize capitalism to save the world from financial destruction, because the big boys in the tall buildings have learned how to computer rob the entire system. [Boolean logic]

The massive problem of computerized speculation of financial markets requires a new computerization of international capitalism, to rectify.

Hear's a clear goal - We must democratize the international financial architecture to democratize the local economies into real sustainability.

If you balanced all the world's balance of payments - exchange rates and purchasing price parities, you would save enough to pay all the world's debts.

Balance can be financed by the profits of a future re-balancing efficiency.

A law of world problems - All problems exist in exact relationship to the imbalances between peoplecrafted intelligences and statecrafted laws verses the natural laws of mind, logic, nature and science!

Law is a concept, but only ideal morally/ethically principled law is the ultimate truth - the perfect balance!

The greatest magnitude of law is currency law.

Currency balance is the central natural law that balances all the natural laws of state!

Only truly balanced currency laws, of a real level playing field, can create true universal symmetrical system integrity.

The scarcest resource of all is real value money!

I'm designing a better mousetrap - A better law structure to govern the world's money.

An international constitution of computerized exchange clearing, based on a 1 to 20% per year sliding time scale law structure, written toward balancing global prices and values, can achieve the golden moral mean - A pragmatic and logical center of thought.

A balanced system can create authentic moral values' improvement.

I can imagine many better systems and many better constitutions.

In my opinion, the ultimate answer is the balance of international democracies and markets.

We have the technology and ability to computerize capitalism's unbalanced pricing system into a super-moral perfect competition balance!

The answer is, balance the prices!

Universal problems require universal solutions.

We must re-balance real prices of the world.

We have the sciences, technology and abilities to solve all our problems - It's just they're all jumbled in everyone's heads - We need coherence!

Overproduction and resource depletion is forcing us to develop a mind of wisdom.

The universal wisdom is a balanced competition.

Total truth and wisdom can only be created with new, highly principled, laws.

The fundamental problem of America is understanding what's wrong - And what that fundamental problem is - Is law - Bretton Woods Law - I hate to be so blunt, but until you're willing to deal with it, you're just flapping your wings in the air!

Currency law is the only law to create the most moral certainty.

Laws must be written to create a level playing field.

The soul of capitalism is the balance of money.

This is no longer the story of rebuilding America - It's the story of rebuilding the world.

In my opinion, unless we create a practical heaven on earth, hell on earth is our future.

Due to the extreme gravity of massive global problems - We need quick solutions - We can't wait 20 years for a solution.

We must find a way to harness mobile, shadow banking, money to increase democracy, now!

The fundamental and absolute problem is law!

Exchange rates are the law of all laws!

The fundamental law of change - Nothing happens or changes without law changes!

Democracy's law system is moving upstream into the international corporate law system.

At present, drastically imbalanced floating paper rules as the new insane law!

The sanctity of contracts - The private law system...!

Money's power can only be balanced by law!

Law is greed's only governor!

I'm not interested in system change, I'm interested in proper interpretation and understanding of the existing system and architecture law change to improve it.

Law - Truth - One law will change the whole world - The law of perfect liberty - The law of money!

Without an international clearing house, national democracies are now impossible of surviving!

The law of the law - International law controls all nations' laws, no matter what local laws you pass!

The law does all harm and good to and for society!

Law is the number one universal vehicle of truth.

All ideas must be joined under one roof of law!

The passions of the people must be turned to laws to expand public liberty.

The world is in such a mess, we must pass sliding time scale law structures to get out of it.

If you want peace, you gotta change the law system that's creating war!

In my opinion, man is incapable of respecting the natural laws, so society will, one day, have to be turned over to computers!

We should support laws toward re-aligning wages, prices and currencies to real purchasing price parity equilibrium, to create a level playing field, to stop excess offshoring, outsourcing and in-sourcing, neutralize nefarious trade and transactions' extractions, return the I.M.F., World Bank, and W.T.O. to work the public good again, rebuild global subsidiarity to sustainable levels, to found truly viable comparative advantage - globally, reduce speculation and excess debt and create jobs, by saving trillions of dollars for the public good.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Theories, Theories and Theories...

Well, I can certainly see how you may see it that way, as I did also when I first thought these ideas up, back in the mid `80's, but with enough thought and theorizing put to the overall dynamics of any problems created by over-computerization of the tasks mentioned, I realized our natural evolutionary needs of jobs, as computer-robotics un-employs the populations of the world by the millions, was and is going to happen no matter what you, I or anyone thinks, as capitalism is a system of efficiency, which naturally uses the new-found efficiencies of computer-robotics, and global databasing inventory systems, no matter what we may want__System's evolution is one-up-man-shipping us in this area, far beyond our natural evolutionary potentials of humaness. Since the computerization is going to happen anyway, I realized it may as well be as well thought out as possible, and implemented in the most complimentary method possible of benefitting humankind, instead of just letting it happen hap-hazzardly. So, when one truly assesses the future thoroughly inductively, of all processes integrations, one easily realizes the human benefits of manipulating the computerized evolutions over not manipulating their paths...

Now, if you look back over all I've mentioned in those notes, you'll see they are really limited to particular legislative areas, which were mentioned all throughout the notes, and in all my past writings over the last four years. My computer and law change ideas are limited to international financial market and trade law changes__First... These are the only areas of law I advocate computerizing, and this area at present has little computerized legal action involved__Oh, it's certainly true there's plenty of non-legal action involved, and by this I don't mean illegal, as it's all legal, it's just it's not under any nation's legal control__It's entirely under corporate control, by all nations' corporations involved in globalism. This is the area that needs be brought under control, as this is the place the 'big boys in the tall buildings' are speculating all the wealth and profits of all nations, into the tax havens, thus forcing the gov's. to push the tax burdens off on us poor unsuspecting citizens__This must change. And, any big corporate derivative system raiders who be put out of a job, deserves to be put out of a job, as look at how many more average citizens are being put out of jobs now, by these evil pin-headed corporate raiders, of far lesser intergrity and number. So, if they be put out of work__good...! Let them beat the streets, to find a legitimate job, as I'd love to see the good side of the Boolean computers, put these slime-balls out of work, for a change...

Next, just let me mention to you, that by you asking your question, just last night I finally extended my idea discovery to an area I've been trying to finish for over forty years, and that's the fact of how do we, as a nation or world, know what actionable intelligence to make and take, when we know from our best historians, they must end their histories 20 to 50 years ago, to be seriously truthful, due to the fact the newest and closest information, required to make accurate history, has not yet been collected and digested into rational facts of cause and effect. The best historians will stop at 50 years ago, and others at 20 or less years ago, so it just goes to show us the difficulty of making real-time decisions, that will have true and knowable effectiveness, if we respect the information and interpretation time processes... Yet, what was realized last night, is a scientific method to close this gap, through the use of modal logic, over model logic, guided by category logic and historical logic. This allows a very up-to-date proper order logic of scientific accuracy, never before thought possible. It's very new to me, yet I've been working toward this goal for many years, so I'll just give some of the preliminaries of it's workings and new abilities of problems solutions, I've realized this new scientific system is truly capable of...

I've discovered a new scientific methodology of necessary historical and political action__which can actually scientifically model ideas into the future__dynamically. This idea is based on using inductive logic over deductive logic, since discovering deductive logic is simply micro actions, yet inductive logic is the real world's macro actions. I discovered this by realizing E=MC^2 is really V^sum=V^msum, or that both sides of Einstein's equation are only about velocity, where the left side of the equation is the total sum, of the right side's total measurable sum of all velocities, based on the c metric. In other words, the left side is the triadic sum of the right side's triadic velocities of matter/mass times the c metric squared. This simple investigative process of realizing mass is a triadic velocity, allowed me to see deeper into the universal constants of modal and model logics, governed by category and historical logics, to unite old ideas I've been working on for years, into a visionary wisdom system, that is fully grounded and entirely scientifically provable, out into the distant future__simply by using the future modeling capacities of existing modal, category and historical logics. This may at first sound complicated, but it's really not, as it's foundation is simple ratio-mathematics of the four methods of logics involved__to produce better ordered futures' logics__By realizing 'Goals Define Histories'. This all allows a future modal logic model proof__with no pieces of history missing__which has been the present problem of incompleteness. This new system opens up the possibility of A New Science of Technological Utopian Thinking__A New Science of Wisdom__A New Science of Necessary Actionable Intelligence... A Possible Science of Necessary Utopia Modeling__A Science of Right Action__A Science of Necessary Wisdom Logic__A Science of Necessary Political Action__A New Science of Possible, Probable and Necessary Wisdom-Logic...

Deduction = Concept Division = No ToE Possible
Induction = Concept Unification = The Only ToE Possible
The Triadic Velocities of Particles = Linear_Angular_Spin
The Triadic Velocities of Mass
Mass = Total Angular & Spin Velocities to Linear Velocity

What would a 'logical solution' then be, to a computer program?

The simple mathematical goal, of humanity's best ordered, and best balanced incentivized liberty...

Don't feel lonely, as my attempts to interface logic and ethics have given me many a mind-spin__But it's finally becomming clear, and clarity has power to get my ideas across to those I know are necessary to be reached, so I'll be working all the bugs out of this new system, over the next few months...

Any help anyone could offer, I'd sure appreciate it, even if that help is just asking simple or complex questions, as my mind will have to work to fill in any blanks or blind spots... Thank you all in advance, and thank you Lorrina for asking the trigger questions...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

A Master Vision of Universal Wisdom…


There exists a Universal wisdom knower, of all human minds__he wants to meet you, as he’s a major part of your own mind, you may not have yet realized… This same idea can be expressed through the science of modal wisdom__or the science of future logic, thought to its ultimate limits__and everyone possesses this natural ability. It’s nothing but your childhood mind, of deep critical imagination…

If you don’t yet believe the above paragraph, just let me set up one possible model of mind, that’s really been brewing over the last century or so... Consider the mind as an infinite sided mirror, rotating one vision of reality after another before your perception analyzer__continuously all your life. Further consider this to be a close analogy to what quantum mechanics proposed early in the last century__that of a world of all possible worlds, and that one of them is the real world. Also consider the most recent discoveries about mirror neurons in monkies, having the ability to copy behavior of what’s seen of others. Now, consider this infinite sided mirror to have the ability to mirror every action of ever citizen, plant and animal on planet Earth, without acception…

Such a perception analyzer would be a considerably powerful computer, if the individual possessed the power of interpretation and directional use over this bio-computer. Well, man actually does have such capacity through his choice of free-will__But, just what does free-will entail? Is it thinking about the past, present or future? Is it thinking about the possibilities, probabilities and necessities of life, or something else? Really, if you think about it, both the last two sentences’ contents just about covers what the mind is capable of, at all times__We/I constantly think about all past, present and future visions, through the many possibilities, probabilities and necessities, but also the deeper thoughts of the alternatives of each. By the alternatives, I simply mean the internal thought processes of all past, present and future states of thought, of both sentences’ contents, i.e., if we be thinking about ourselves or others in any past, present or future state of contemplation, we also can envision their internal state of vision, as to the deeper states of all states possible. This is really quite an amazing computer, sitting atop our shoulders…

By thinking about this deep enough, one realizes the entire mechanics represents a background independent processing machine. It’s hindered by nothing in its infinite capacities, accept its own reason and logic circuits, to separate the infinite imagination and emotions, from the finite rational and logical circuits__and when viewed thoroughly enough, by its even deeper innate mathematical logical circuits__of ratioed thoughts__as ratioed thoughts are the final arbiter of all logic and emotion circuits. So, when one truly views this amazing lil’ ol’ machine, one is struck by the question__Is it alive, or just the simple mechanical processing machine described above…? Are we animate, or truly inanimate…? Can we know, what we think we know, about knowing at all…? Do we know, or just convince ourselves we know, by viewing the asymmetry of the infinite mirror processor in action…? Can we possibly know at the speed of light__even if light is considerably slowed in and by our gray matter…? It’s still much faster and more complex than we could ever hope to realize its full potential__Isn’t it…?

Thinking it over, in general, what can we understand about this lil’ ol’ mechanical ball of mush, on our shoulders…? It seems the closer we try and get to the parts actions and particulars of these functions, the less is truly possible of knowing__Yet, the closer we try and get to the whole’s actions and particulars of its functions, the more we can truly gleen and know about its overall mechanics. Historically, looking back over all its individual functions, we/I simply see humanity as a bunch of insects, poking around in the mold of planet Earth, never accomplishing much accept to recycle everything, including ourselves/themselves__Yet, when looked at as a whole, there seems to appear a pattern to all this seeming madness. Historically, we no longer feed Christians to the lions, though many would still like to. We no longer accept the brutalities of old, as accepted forms of action. We no longer slaughter at will, any time we feel the urge… So, historically, life has changed and evolved, to a more civil form of life__and I’d say we’d have to accept this as a ‘moral achievement’ of human historical evolution. So, the history of the species actually does have a ‘Goal’, from all the historical evidence, to improve its moral condition__no matter what’s been academically stated falsely about morality__It’s real, by the evidence of ‘all’ history…

This evidence counters much of philosophical history, and actually gives a true ‘Purpose’ to life, that many have been, and are arguing against__But the evidence is overwhelmingly clear. The ‘Goal’ of humanity seems to be moral enhancement__So, even if the dynamic being be viewed as a simple processing machine(in its least state of action), it still has a moral/ethical/esthetic objective, and or ‘Goal’, of achievement__as ‘all’ history is mightily evidence to. This is the reason, I’ve stated so much about Charles Sanders Peirce, as he’s actually the only person I know who created an entire school of scientific thought dedicated to the study of future human action, based on ‘Esthetics’__The Science of Goals…

Without studying the Scientific Goals of Humanity, we have nothing but ‘a theory of re-cycling insects…’ Goals are what separate us as a different species, from all the other species__Moral Goals__The Truly Asymmetric Liberties of Humanity…

[labelwench]

I'll have to re-read these on the flip-side, Lloyd. I've done run out of time, although I did spend some time earlier in the day assisting Antonio with new wardrobe ideas, LOL.... Will check back here in the morning.

Any thought as to the long term effects on ecology and economy from the Gulf oil situation and the recent China oil spill? Perhaps I am too far removed from the mainstream to have an accurate picture of these disasters, yet it seems we are not paying enough attention to the appropriate things. The media coverage feels as though it has been stifled. That amount of oil isn't just going to vanish without a trace? Just my opinion. What do I know.....

[Lloyd Gillespie]

The Innate Modal Ratio-Logic of Hope…


Most are so influenced by the old adage; “If we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it”, that they take this worn-out phrase as gospel__Nothing could be further from the truth. What’s the past got to do with the future…? Do we want or need to know this dated ancestral worship phrase at all...? Does it serve any community of people, to worship the mistakes of the past...? Is worshipping the dead knowledge of the past, one of our major problems, or possibly the entire problem, with learning and academics...? I say plainly and simply__Yes it is…!!!

Instead of people being guided into the creative directional knowledge and wisdom of better future courses of action__far too many schools of thought are far too overly-concentrated on studying the dead past’s mistakes__instead of any real and true hope for our necessary futures. Do we want to repeat the past…? No…!!! Then why keep studying the bad non-directionality of our ancestors__They’ve eliminated not, the poverty, that’s truly creating the crime and wars…? This seems to me to be the most foolish action possible, to follow, as what’s truly needed is a new directional intelligence into our solid futures of new, possible, probable and necessary hopes. This would be the modal logics of a new future directional path for our overly concentrated “in the past” mentalities. We must begin to redirect our minds to these new possible futures, if we are ever to truly move forward, and leave these dead past fallacies to the dustbins of history__where they’ve belonged for far too long, for my memory to even conceive…

If one just truly looks to the world’s greatest orators__What was their true power…? Was it talking ceaselessly about the dead past, or new, possible and better futures, and their purity of hope…? The answer is easy__It was always talking about new, possible, probable and necessary better futures, whether we speak of Gandhi, Martin Luther King or John F. Kennedy, etc, on and on__Then go back through all history’s great orators and oratory writers, and you’ll easily see the world was attracted to the new roads of “The Directional Hope for New Futures”, they all offered__Not, re-hashing the dead and useless past…

If there’s one lesson we must learn; “It’s the lesson of paying attention to the positive hope, for the new actionable and directional intelligence futures, that may be offered by all beings, living or dead, all throughout history, since hope springs eternal, in the human soul, if one but looks__It's the all pervasively important path to follow and or lead…” I can tell you sincerely, that from all my years of study, I never learned anything from any of those teachers of the negative voices, harping on the ancestral worships, of eras long passed away. I only learned from the greats with the positive messages of hope, for better futures__and I don’t, for a second, think anyone can learn anything from these pessimistic pin-heads, of the negative schools of thought. We learn new and positive paths, and directions of true actionable intelligence__Only from those ‘Great Dreamers of Hope’__For better tomorrows…!!!

It’s now been a thousand years since this plausible ground was first fully ploughed and harrowed, by the great Ibn Sina__and it’s technical name is ‘modal logic’, the logic of future hope, divided into its three major classifications of__Possibility__Probability__and, Necessity, or those thinking states most aligned with Hope__Which is ‘Always future tense’__’Never, past tense…’ And, anyone who doesn’t recognize the necessity of honestly thinking about the future state of humanity’s needs, in a world running short of resources and intellectual talent, is blind, to the realities we face__as a caring species…

So, my major suggestion is to thoroughly investigate what ‘innate modal logic’ truly is, and who of history were its greatest proponents. As a clue, these famous orators and oratory writers have existed in all ages, and were finally brought to its highest levels in the three main orators, Gandhi, Kennedy and King, yet they’d never have achieved the level of actionable and directional intelligence they achieved, if they hadn’t learned the extreme importance of ‘The Modal Logic of Hope’. And, where did this mostly come from…? It came from the study of every positive logic student who ever studied the positive logic greats, from the beginning of time, but it’s truly not even a scholarly learning process__It’s the truly innate functioning mechanics of all human minds’ deep inner core, if they but recognize__the “dead-negatives” must all be canceled__to see the possible, probable and necessary “positive hopes”, for the better, future, possible state actions, and directions, of all humankind…

My studies never taught me a thing, until I discovered my own path of hope, and all the greats of history, who taught this same directional path of actionable intelligence and wisdom… The ‘possible’ futures’ social directions, teach the present__Everything__The past’s ‘negative-impossible’ directions for any social futures, teaches the present__Nothing…!!!

I think we better study the modal logicians, or at least, start using our own innate modal logics__Perceptronic logic__The Simple Innate Ratio-Logic of, Better Hoped-For, and Self-Sovereignly Created Futures…!!! Don’t you…???

Tribute To Our "New Deal..."
A Link...