Hi:
I think it is amazing that there is this discussion going on in the
list at this point!
I have been traveling for the past two weeks doing presentations of
our new research so I have not been connected all the time. But while
I was traveling, I also have been preparing myself to teach a course
on modeling next week.
The class is supposed to review different "thinking strategies" and
is meant to provide tools for those who are beginning to work in
their final MA works.
I did not intend to touch this subject of Aristotle's postulates, but
as I sought to explain terms such as system, structure, models, etc.
and I was led back to this topic. Why? I found that--at least for
me-- it was impossible to get into a discussion of complex systems
without visiting this route first.
While very few of us can read the Greek philosophers in their
vernacular, or to do an in-depth study of the context(s) in which
those texts were created, they are still extremely useful, and
beautiful. Also, I have found that the students really enjoy them.
Regards,
Lily
>i don't know why you,
>keith,
>bring a new twist into the discussion: "positive" consciousness. what then
>is negative consciousness?
>
>true, "false consciousness" is meant to be denegrating.
>
>from my more dialogical perspective, the nounphrase suggests to name a fact
>while diverting attention from the situation in which it is uttered, a
>situation in which a "superior" mind judges an "inferior mind.
>
>using the term "false consciousness" says more about who the user of this
>term assumes to be then about what it describes
>
>klaus
>
>klaus krippendorff
>gregory bateson term professor for cybernetics, language, and culture
>the annenberg school for communication
>university of pennsylvania
>3620 walnut street
>philadelphia, pa 19104.6220
>phone: 215.898.7051 (O); 215.545.9356 (H)
>fax: 215.898.2024 (O); 215.545.9357 (H)
>usa
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhDs in Design
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Keith Russell
>Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 12:02 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Aristotle's Principle of Non-Contradiction -- reply to
>KlausKrippendorff
>
>
>Dear Klaus
>
>I don't mind the Aristotle and your perspective on Aristotelian
>understandings of a positive consciousness.
>
>The notion of "false consciousness" is post -Kantian in the sense that it
>requires a reflection on consciousness - that is, it is a negative account.
>
>Hearclitus is raised by Aristotle in relation to the fragment that talks
>about God both permitting herself to be callled "god" and not allowing
>herself to be called "god" - that is, that all positive states of
>consciousness are underwritten by negative states - which will lead
>ultimately to the dreaded HEGEL and negative dialectics and a presumption
>that consciousness is about things which are held in a negative realtionship
>(the state of not being finished even if the act might be deemed a FACT and
>hence become, in time, positive).
>
>Cybernetics is positive?
>
>all the best
>
>keith
>
>
>
>
>
>>>> klaus krippendorff <[log in to unmask]> 09/12/03 13:34 PM >>>
>this is what aristotle said (translated of course):
>
>This, then, is the most certain of all principles, .... For it is impossible
>for any one to believe the same thing to be and not to be, as some think
>Heraclitus says. For what a man says, he does not necessarily believe; and
>if it is impossible that contrary attributes should belong at the same time
>to the same subject (the usual qualifications must be presupposed in this
>premiss too), and if an opinion which contradicts another is contrary to it,
>obviously it is impossible for the same man at the same time to believe the
>same thing to be and not to be;
>
>so nobody can have a false consciousness -- consciousness taken to be aware
>of one's beliefs. "false consciousness" is the assessment by observers who
>by applying the very attribute of "false consciousness" to observed others
>deny them their own cognitive ability and place themselves in a (god-like)
>epistemological position above the observed others. so, let's not use such
>constructions on each other and respect the cognitive autonomy of others
>even if they are lying (perhaps for their own reasons) or if we don't agree
>with them.
>
>klaus
>
>klaus krippendorff
>gregory bateson term professor for cybernetics, language, and culture
>the annenberg school for communication
>university of pennsylvania
>3620 walnut street
>philadelphia, pa 19104.6220
>phone: 215.898.7051 (O); 215.545.9356 (H)
>fax: 215.898.2024 (O); 215.545.9357 (H)
>usa
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhDs in Design
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
>Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 12:17 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Aristotle's Principle of Non-Contradiction -- reply to Klaus
>Krippendorff
>
>
>Dear Klaus,
>
>You are probably seeking Aristotle's principle of
>non-contradiction. It appears somewhere in The
>Organon, but I am not sure where. He also defends
>the law in The Metaphysics.
>
>The principle is a rule of Aristotelian logic stating
>that something cannot both be and not be at the
>same time in the same respect.
>
>Rather than stating that someone CAN not contradict
>himself, Aristotle states that we MAY or SHOULD
>not contradict ourselves if our statements are to
>be meaningful or logical.
>
>Together with the law of identity and the law of
>the excluded middle, the law of non-contradiction
>constitutes the laws of thought that many logicians
>and philosophers define as the foundation of valid
>logical inference. (I'm not defending every element
>of this statement, but answering your question in
>terms of Aristotelian logic. For example, the challenge
>that fuzzy logic provides to the law of the excluded
>middle accounts for the furor that fuzzy logic
>occasions in some circles. Similarly, Korzbsky's
>non-Aristotelian logics also created some fuss on
>similar principles.)
>
>If I can locate my Organon or my Metaphysics
>in the dramatically non-excluded middle of my
>study, I will report on the exact location of
>Aristotle's discourses on these topics.
>
>Yours,
>
>Ken
>
>--
>
>Klaus Krippendorff wrote,
>
>"along this thread, aristotle is supposed to have put forth a law saying
>that
>you can't contradict yourself. i consider this to be correct but wonder if
>anyone knows the name of that law or has a reference for me to check this
>out."
>
>--
>
>--
>
>Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
>Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
>Department of Leadership and Organization
>Norwegian School of Management
>
>Visiting Professor
>Advanced Research Institute
>School of Art and Design
>Staffordshire University
--
-------------------------------------------
Dr. Lily Díaz-Kommonen
Senior Researcher,
Systems of Representation
Tutor in Visualization and Dynamic Processes
Media Lab
University of Art and Design Helsinki/UIAH
135C Hämeentie SF 00560 FINLAND
+ 358 9 75630 338
+ 358 9 75630 555 FAX
+ 358 40 7256925 GSM
<[log in to unmask]>
<http://sysrep.uiah.fi>
<http://cipher.uiah.fi>
<http://mlab.uiah.fi/mulli/e_index.html>
|