Wednesday, March 18, 2009

The Isomorphic Gates of Perception

“His maxim will be this: The elements of every concept enter into logical thought at the gate of perception and make their exit at the gate of purposive action; and whatever cannot show its passports at both those two gates is to be arrested as unauthorized by reason. " Charles Sanders Peirce

Charles Sanders Peirce was the world’s foremost genius, not only of his time, but of all times___no man or woman stands higher, not even the greats, Archimedes, Newton or Einstein. We could even line up all the world’s greatest philosophers, poets and artists, and none would reach his heights of intellectual and soulful understanding of the entire mechanics of the mind, people and nations, which is all then isomorphically inter-related to the world, and all its systems. The integrative power of his triadically inductive mind has no match. `God’, most of the world’s citizens don’t even understand what a triadic mind is___What a shame.

Since my grandfather attended college in Peirce’s time, and he being America’s premier scientist, then studied by gramps, I and my entire family benefited tremendously early on, by the principles he learned studying this great man, and passed it on to us. Gramps also applied it to business, politics and all his personal, social and family relations, to the end of his days___I thank him for his early teachings, personally to me, as he was a truly talented teacher also, but I now know how much he benefited from attending college when such a seminal character was at the heights of American academics and intellect___Nothing is more obvious to me at the later age of 63___having seriously studied Peirce over the last six years. The links between gramps, my father and mother, extended family and myself, related to Peircean thinking, grow clearer and stronger every day.

Since Peirce was a true epistemologist, I’ve spent the last year thoroughly studying all sources on the subject, to supplement what I’d studied back in the `80’s. And, since he was also a true first rate humanist, scientist, logician and mathematician, I’ve studied most all of them as well, by following all others’ Peircean links, as well as all he mentioned in his many published works, and the partially published micro-films, of much of the only recently published works, by authors such as the Fin, Pietarinen___”Signs of Logic”, an excellent book, by-the-way___A great comparison history between Wittgenstein’s later ideas and Peirce’s thinking___I highly recommend the book. So, I think I’ve earned the right to voice my ideas of the man, and his ideas, as per my personal interpretation of.

Anyone who has studied the historical record will soon discover Peirce to be the least understood of philosopher mathematician scientists, ever to have lived. His ideas have been stolen, corrupted, lied about, absolutely mis-interpreted, castigated, ostracized, ridiculed and out-right banished from the last 100 years of the historical evolution of ideas, to be only quite recently making a proud and strong comeback, due to the lies finally being dis-credited, and many of the world’s militaries and secret services realizing these ideas’ values___Extremely High Values. Peirce’s pragmatic system of thought is a “Scientific Method of Solutions to All Societies Problems”, as it’s a method of, first and foremost, “How to Think”; then maybe people can properly be taught “What to Rightly Think”, as it’s a total system of right thinking___Not required, just right, as in “Right Heartedness, Right Mindedness, Right Action”, the ancient Chinese triadic system of right feeling, thought, and action.

Peirce spoke often in the language of semeiotics, or signs, when he was speaking of perception, cognitions and conceptions. He also spoke often of “logica utens”, or folk logic, normal people’s language, and “logica docens”, or academic logic and the intellectuals’ language, plus the interpreter, which would be perception, in its many guises of “I’s”, as defined by the first pragmatist, Socrates___Knowledge is perception___We see it, we know it. To make this easier to understand we only need to isomorphically, morphically, update, these ideas to “Mother Wit”, “Common Sense”, and “Wisdom Logic”. “Wisdom Logic” can also be stated as “Psychological Wisdom” or “Spiritual Wisdom”, as psychology and spiritualism are easily seen as isomorphic to logic, as logic is simply the a priori mathematical essence of all three, culminating in perception, creating the ability for all of us to realize our best natures, as well as our higher natures. All this has been thoroughly explicated by Jesse Prinz and Phyllis Chiasson, as well as by Pietarinen___I’m just adding the clearer isomorphic links. It’s all a simple path from spiritual, psychological and logical semantics to scientific pragmatic actions, toward clear knowledge___Let’s all eclectically take the true path, and avoid the narrow road of relative pluralism.

All the above is as later Wittgenstein, and Peirce always stated, “Science is just an extension of our basic instincts”. This is to say the “Docens” is built on, and an extension of our basic instinctual “Utens”, and I say is thoroughly isomorphic through our a priori mathematical essence agent___this will require the inductive proofs, which I will leave for another post. Furthermore, I’ve recently discovered many of the “Universal Scientific Laws and Formulas” are thoroughly isomorphic to our universal social systems, especially those of Archimedes “Center of Mass” formula and law of, Newton’s “1st 2nd 3rd Laws of Motion” and Einsteins “Universal Law of Mass E=MC^2”, and can be used as inductive proof systems of. I just don’t wish to explain these all now, as it will make this post too long___later.

Peirce’s original quote at the beginning of this post, “…the gate of perception” is very important in understanding his system. Also, his quote, “logic is rooted in the social principle”, and “the ego and the non-ego”, will make his and anyone’s mind mechanics more easily understood, when thoroughly explained. We all know we perceive, cognize and interpret conceptions, but how does this process actually function? Most would think they have a pretty good idea, but do they? Where does judgment enter the equation? What is the process of a priori essence in relation to logic in self and the social principle? What is the non-ego in relation to the triadic functioning of all thoughts? I can tell you for far too many years, I am guilty of having my logic, judgment and a priori essence all scrambled in the wrong thinking processes and agent areas, but have since by finally understanding Peirce, been able to do the better re-adjustments to thought. If logic and judgment are installed, by our free will choice, in the ego, we are subject to all the faults the mind can easily multiply, especially turning both far too omniscient and other maladies, just as early Wittgenstein did with his first book on logic, and also as Frege did, by thinking logic was the a priori agent of mathematics___nothing could be further from the truth. Wittgenstein later adjusted more to Peirce’s way of thinking, but Frege never lived long enough to be proved wrong by Godel, yet Peirce had it right from the beginning. His non-ego was to realize these dangerous agents of logic and judgment should be more directed to the social habits of others___in other words, the social root of, yet I also must recognize the a priori mathematical guide of both, as well as the social habits of the cultures. Peirce never denied this, but never stated it so either, yet we must recognize it as a fact, since logic and judgment are initially of our essence agents. It’s just how we direct the will to use these tools, and that’s all they are is tools, of the mind. By directing them more to the social function of the people’s cultural habits, we reduce the size of our egos and increase the function of our intelligence___Other is always larger and superior to our little egos. The non-ego should have priority over the ego___It’s easy to accomplish by just redirecting the will of “I” perception, to the non-ego social functions of logics and judgments.

“…The elements of every concept enter into logical thought at the gate of perception and make their exit at the gate of purposive action; and whatever cannot show its passports at both those two gates is to be arrested as unauthorized by reason." No better quote has ever been written about the mechanics of perception, a simpler one maybe by Machaivelli, “All men have eyes, but few have the gift of perception”, but not as to the point of its mechanics. The history of perception has been one long argument between deductive and inductive logic, broken stride only by Peirce’s third, the triad of induction, deduction and abduction, or as I have re-interpreted it from Prinz as transduction. It’s just easier to see it as a transductive process, i.e., essence agents exchanging information many times over to settle our ideas and concepts of. Of course when applying it to Peirce’s historical abduction, of how to make our histories clear, then abduction may be the better word to retain, but as to all mechanics taking place inside perception, transduction is the easier system to know. All agents, in order to make concepts and ideas clear, exchange information of the object under investigation by thought, and best accomplished through the public domain integral of habits of the people, of our culture, and all the world’s culture’s. The larger the scope, the more true to the universal truth. I think semantics can only be truly investigated through the pragmatics of the public domain, in relation to self and other, and not by simple a priori logics and or modal logics and semantic game theories. Yes, the latter must be done for AI and computerized web networks, etc., but as to personal knowledge, I say it’s the wrong path of investigation, and Peirce certainly agreed. Nothing can replace humans being human___Intuitively human.

The argument goes that perception is a deductive process, verses an inductive process. Well, I simply ask, “If it’s deductive, where’d the first information within perception come from?” As I adhere to Socrates and Locke’s blank slate mind at birth, and Socrates adhered to the blank slate all his life, possibly because the Oracle set him up by stating, “Socrates is wiser than all the gods.” Anyway, the other side says universal grammar is a primary a priori essence agent, but if so, why no universal verbal language? We have a universal arithmetic language, as all nations math is universally understandable to all, but language/semantics is not, Why? I think Chomsky should thoroughly re-study Peirce’s “universal grammar” to see what it really means___It’s just what we all possess of common ground inductions from birth, Chomsky! Not your stolen ideas’ corruption of Peirce’s original meanings, even though you did read them___Wrongly, I might add.

Now, is perception an inductive or deductive process, first? Is the whole super-consciousness of the entire world in our minds from birth? Do we all see in our minds how to be expert neuro-surgeons? Do we all see in our minds how to be genius atheletes, chemists, biologists? Why, all we have to do is deduct from this universal grammar of Chomsky’s! I think not___It’s a blank slate at birth, except for it’s a priori instinctual senses, math potential abilities, dimensional potential abilities, geometrical potential abilities, etc., yet no universal grammar, as these all precede grammar’s emergent evolution, whether present new-born, or pre-historic civilization learning to count fish to feed a family of five, arithmetic precedes language, or any universal grammar___As then, so now. As soon as the baby opens its eyes, it’s passively inducting the scenery present. It’s deducing it’s hungry possibly, even before opening its eyes, but that’s essence agent instinct eternal in all living creatures. As to deduction verses induction, I think all would have to admit induction is by far the larger process all our lives, as passive perception takes more gigs of memory than any word system, which is also inducted in from our surroundings. I’ll take Locke’s intelligence over Chompsky’s any day, as it’s also in line with my own common sense and hard won knowledge.

A further point of perception’s inductions over deductions as to the mind’s major function, how could we deduct from the whole and end with universal answers? Deduction is always away from wholes and to parts. Only induction is from wholes and parts to wholes. It’s just simple mathematical mechanics. Though deduction is absolutely required in all inductive and abductive/transductive processes, deduction isn’t alone in developing intelligent action for the mind. Induction and abduction play the major roles. Just think about Archimedes, Newton and or Einstein. Their thinking involved major uses of all three systems, yet induction and abduction are the only creators of new thoughts and ideas, as new ideas require addition, and deduction is subtraction, or negative addition, thus all new ideas are either induction or abduction, since deduction always subtracts from the whole. Induction and abduction add to the thus far known whole, as did Archimedes, Newton and Einstein. All three developed entirely new additions to the universal book of knowledge, with their universal mass formulas___that required universal abductions and inductions first___Basic new ideas, from the real objective external universal observations of the whole, in different integral views.

This is just another post in my ongoing thinking about the wisest man in the world. When enough of us dummies on this mixed up planet learn how to think, then maybe a few can delve deeper into Peirce’s economics, to see how his thinking greatly influenced economics through his student Thorstein Veblen and John Maynard Keynes probability math thinking, leading to his great economic breakthroughs. Then maybe we could start listening to the world’s living updated Keynes, smartest global economist___Prof. Paul Davidson… Link

No comments: