Further to my remarks, Eastern Logic is the logic of "complex" physical systems and Western Logic is the logic of "non-complex" physical systems, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties" each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system exhibits no such properties.
The philosophical problem-called Problem of Induction" was solved by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Arlie Christensen with the idea that the induced generalization aka model expresses all of the available information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modelled but no more. Christensen co-authored the paper entitled "Unit measure violations in pattern recognition" that I referred you to in my previous letter to you. In the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism, the statistician and professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet reports the finding from his statistical study that for a large group of people to mistake a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of this system is a precursor to totalitarian rule over the country in which these people live. I write a substack that is titled "Building a Model of A Physical System Without Making a Mistake," where the "mistake" that is referenced is to mistake a "complex" for a "non-complex physical system.
This is certainly interesting. I am not sure about the strict Western system=non-complex system/Eastern system=complete system distinction. I feel that both have existed in both areas. If you compare ancient Greek philosophy and ancient Indian schools, the similarities are really surprising. The ancients probably had more exchanges than we think today. Nevertheless, it is true that the tendencies adopted in the respective development of these cultures are not identical.
That a proposition is Both true and NOT true violates the Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC). That a proposition is neither true nor not true violates the Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM). The LEM and the LNC are amongst Aristotle's three Laws of Thought. That both laws are true is the axiom of probability theory called "unit measure." Violations of "unit measure" by the argument made by a model of a physical system are reported in the peer-reviewed article that is entitledUunit Measure Violations in Pattern Recognition, the authors of which are Ronald Christensen and Thomas Reichert." In this respect, Eastern Logic is consistent with the empirical evidence while Western Logic is inconsistent with this evidence. That unit measure is satisfied by the argument made by a model of a physical system is an assumption of mathematical statistics which is falsified by the empirical evidence.
The existence of this mistake poses a threat to the continued existence of Western civilization that would be alleviated by acceptance of Eastern Logic as legitimate in the Western world.
Thank you so much for your comment. I will definitely read that paper. This is a bit old, but you might be interested in the work of Stephane Lupasco. Most of the people I work with on similar topics in science are Lupasco's readers.
Have read a little of Nagarjuna, while going through Shantideva's Entering on the path to Enlightenment. The path of dependent co-arising could perhaps in more modern terms be spelled out as interdependent origination. Nothing and no one is separate from any one or anything else. Would be interested in your response to this.
You are quite right, "interdependent origination" is one of the translations used for the Sanskrit "pratītyasamutpādā". I used "dependent co-arising" because it is a slightly better rendering of the Sanskrit, and because I think it also emphasizes different aspects of this term, but it is certainly a big debate.
Al;so, the father/mother/child concept of Yamauchi is of interest that if the child no longer exists, the parents are no longer parents. Parenting is such a strange arrangement of co-dependency of both parents to each other and of the child that is totally dependent on them as a young child. If one believes in re-incarnation and of souls, then the child coming in is a soul like the parent souls, the only 'ownership' is the body that houses the soul, but the the child and the parents are then essentially soul brothers/sisters. I wondered if Yamauchi ever spoke of this. I am delving into your book looking for clues. ***
Yamauchi didn't care about soul transmission. This is an issue that is very important in Tibetan Buddhism, but not so important in other areas (i.e., it is more of a debate). Yes, parenthood is both an extraordinary experience and a huge mystery. From my little experience, I feel that the most important thing is love and understanding=compassion. Life is so fragile that we cannot wait for it.
Yes, you are right about Tibetan Buddhism and soul transmission being important to them, and it existed in Druidry in the west, but my delving into Sanskrit Vedas also speaks of the avatars within the Rig Veda being recognised in the different ages. Love is of course the most important in child-rearing regardless of anything else in the great woven fabric of our existence. It is a binding force in life. It is real when we feel it. What is reality though? Even love can be an illusion.
I think the drama we live in is a very real illusion. In altered states of consciousness (not talking of drugs here but in open-eyed meditation, deep contemplation, whatever one likes to call it), in brightness, the edges disappear and everything seems to elongate or stretch into infinity. Of course that could just be another illusion. I like what you wrote: "A true illusion is real as an illusion."***
Not just like this, I love it, especially because you went into detail on Yamauchi's travels. I loved Nagarjuna's (sorry, not easy for me to find the accents over the letters unless in Word.) about the gap between what we think about a thing and the thing itself. 'Our Knowledge is a construction and not reality itself.'
However, I once perceived in an altered state of open-eyed meditation a yellow outline of a person that I thought may have been a thought aura of some sort reach from the person to pick up an object split seconds before the object was picked up in reality as if a pre-thought of intent began performing before the materialization of action. I wondered if it was a psychic insight on my part or the reality of seeing a thought preceding an action. I have practiced open-eyed meditation for many years but this was a one-off experience that remained a puzzle. Thank you for exploring these incredible philosophers and deep thinkers***
Dear Romaric:
Further to my remarks, Eastern Logic is the logic of "complex" physical systems and Western Logic is the logic of "non-complex" physical systems, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties" each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system exhibits no such properties.
The philosophical problem-called Problem of Induction" was solved by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Arlie Christensen with the idea that the induced generalization aka model expresses all of the available information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modelled but no more. Christensen co-authored the paper entitled "Unit measure violations in pattern recognition" that I referred you to in my previous letter to you. In the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism, the statistician and professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet reports the finding from his statistical study that for a large group of people to mistake a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of this system is a precursor to totalitarian rule over the country in which these people live. I write a substack that is titled "Building a Model of A Physical System Without Making a Mistake," where the "mistake" that is referenced is to mistake a "complex" for a "non-complex physical system.
Cordially,
Terry Oldberg
Thanks for the additional explanation.
This is certainly interesting. I am not sure about the strict Western system=non-complex system/Eastern system=complete system distinction. I feel that both have existed in both areas. If you compare ancient Greek philosophy and ancient Indian schools, the similarities are really surprising. The ancients probably had more exchanges than we think today. Nevertheless, it is true that the tendencies adopted in the respective development of these cultures are not identical.
Best wishes,
Romaric
That a proposition is Both true and NOT true violates the Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC). That a proposition is neither true nor not true violates the Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM). The LEM and the LNC are amongst Aristotle's three Laws of Thought. That both laws are true is the axiom of probability theory called "unit measure." Violations of "unit measure" by the argument made by a model of a physical system are reported in the peer-reviewed article that is entitledUunit Measure Violations in Pattern Recognition, the authors of which are Ronald Christensen and Thomas Reichert." In this respect, Eastern Logic is consistent with the empirical evidence while Western Logic is inconsistent with this evidence. That unit measure is satisfied by the argument made by a model of a physical system is an assumption of mathematical statistics which is falsified by the empirical evidence.
The existence of this mistake poses a threat to the continued existence of Western civilization that would be alleviated by acceptance of Eastern Logic as legitimate in the Western world.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California
terry_oldberg@yahoo.com
Thank you so much for your comment. I will definitely read that paper. This is a bit old, but you might be interested in the work of Stephane Lupasco. Most of the people I work with on similar topics in science are Lupasco's readers.
Thanks for getting in touch with me, Romaaric!
Terry
All the pleasure is mine!
Have read a little of Nagarjuna, while going through Shantideva's Entering on the path to Enlightenment. The path of dependent co-arising could perhaps in more modern terms be spelled out as interdependent origination. Nothing and no one is separate from any one or anything else. Would be interested in your response to this.
You are quite right, "interdependent origination" is one of the translations used for the Sanskrit "pratītyasamutpādā". I used "dependent co-arising" because it is a slightly better rendering of the Sanskrit, and because I think it also emphasizes different aspects of this term, but it is certainly a big debate.
It is indeed!
Al;so, the father/mother/child concept of Yamauchi is of interest that if the child no longer exists, the parents are no longer parents. Parenting is such a strange arrangement of co-dependency of both parents to each other and of the child that is totally dependent on them as a young child. If one believes in re-incarnation and of souls, then the child coming in is a soul like the parent souls, the only 'ownership' is the body that houses the soul, but the the child and the parents are then essentially soul brothers/sisters. I wondered if Yamauchi ever spoke of this. I am delving into your book looking for clues. ***
Yamauchi didn't care about soul transmission. This is an issue that is very important in Tibetan Buddhism, but not so important in other areas (i.e., it is more of a debate). Yes, parenthood is both an extraordinary experience and a huge mystery. From my little experience, I feel that the most important thing is love and understanding=compassion. Life is so fragile that we cannot wait for it.
Yes, you are right about Tibetan Buddhism and soul transmission being important to them, and it existed in Druidry in the west, but my delving into Sanskrit Vedas also speaks of the avatars within the Rig Veda being recognised in the different ages. Love is of course the most important in child-rearing regardless of anything else in the great woven fabric of our existence. It is a binding force in life. It is real when we feel it. What is reality though? Even love can be an illusion.
Can it be an illusion? I am not sure. Of course, it is possible to feel love for people who do not deserve it, which is definitely a disturbing fact.
Besides, a true illusion is real as an illusion!
I think the drama we live in is a very real illusion. In altered states of consciousness (not talking of drugs here but in open-eyed meditation, deep contemplation, whatever one likes to call it), in brightness, the edges disappear and everything seems to elongate or stretch into infinity. Of course that could just be another illusion. I like what you wrote: "A true illusion is real as an illusion."***
Thank you. I also feel that this drama is a kind of illusion; sometimes pleasant and sometimes not!
Not just like this, I love it, especially because you went into detail on Yamauchi's travels. I loved Nagarjuna's (sorry, not easy for me to find the accents over the letters unless in Word.) about the gap between what we think about a thing and the thing itself. 'Our Knowledge is a construction and not reality itself.'
However, I once perceived in an altered state of open-eyed meditation a yellow outline of a person that I thought may have been a thought aura of some sort reach from the person to pick up an object split seconds before the object was picked up in reality as if a pre-thought of intent began performing before the materialization of action. I wondered if it was a psychic insight on my part or the reality of seeing a thought preceding an action. I have practiced open-eyed meditation for many years but this was a one-off experience that remained a puzzle. Thank you for exploring these incredible philosophers and deep thinkers***