Logic is life
Some philosophical ponderings before Christmas...
A common problem in philosophy is the attempt to explain causality. At least since Hume, it has been rightly understood that the tools of physics cannot help us to explain causal events. In a mechanical system defined by space and time, there is only necessity - the necessary relations between objects in the spatiotemporal realm.
Also, as Wittgenstein rightly pointed out, logical relationships do not exist in themselves in the spatiotemporal realm. They have no essence and can only be understood as relational properties between different objects or entities - relationships again defined in terms of space and time.
The function of logic for us humans, and indeed for all living organisms, is to establish relationships that are necessary in order for us to function as intentional beings. We set up goals, and analyze the world in order to get what we want. The logical operators are properties of spatiotemporal relationships. And, Or, If... Then and If And Only If each define different relationships that in turn give causal meaning to organisms trying to reach goals.
If logic cannot be understood other than as spatiotemporal relationships, and if logic is engaged when trying to establish causality in order to perform intentional behavior, should there not be a relationship between logic, causality and intention that moves above and beyond the spatiotemporal realm? That adds additional information except for that provided by physics?
I would argue that this is the case, and that what is missing is another vector. Space can be understood as three vectors, and time as one, making the mechanical spatiotemporal realm consist of four vectors. With these four vectors, there can be no causality. However, logic is engaged in finding relationships between these four vectors, implying a fifth, "logical vector". And this vector in turn is a necessary requirement in order for intentional behavior to come about.
If we assume a world of five vectors, the fifth being a "logic vector" of intentionality (subjective intentionality of a living organism, that is) which is necessary in order to understand spatiotemporal relationships when goal-directed individuals assume or establish causality, in my view a lot of misunderstandings are cleared up. Then it can be rightly understood that neither intention, nor causality, are objective spatiotemporal phenomena that can be explained by physics. They are subjective traits of living organisms. They have no extension in space or time and work as representations of space and time, or as representations of spatiotemporal relationships.
The property of this fifth dimension, or vector of intentionality, is logic. Hence, life is logic, or more correctly, life is a vector whose property is a logically derived representation of the spatiotemporal realm in order to infer causality, thereby making it possible to engage in goal-directed behavior.
Complicated? I'll try and see if I can clean up my argument a bit the next time I write about it. But I think that the main thrust holds. Also, I think that we know that it is true, and that we have to know that it is true in order to engage in social behavior. We try to infer the logical inferences of others and understand them as intentional constructs in order to coordinate our own behavior with that of others. We have just been unable to come up with a good description of what we do in language and mathematics. (On a side-note, the "theory of mind" which is a commonly known concept in psychology, is nothing else than a theory of intentional behavior, or an attempt to take the intentionality vector into account when making representations of the world).
What we need is to acknowledge another vector, or another dimension, if we ever want to understand life. Present-day physics won't do. For those of you who have read him, I think that Elliott Jaques could help us sort things out.
A common problem in philosophy is the attempt to explain causality. At least since Hume, it has been rightly understood that the tools of physics cannot help us to explain causal events. In a mechanical system defined by space and time, there is only necessity - the necessary relations between objects in the spatiotemporal realm.
Also, as Wittgenstein rightly pointed out, logical relationships do not exist in themselves in the spatiotemporal realm. They have no essence and can only be understood as relational properties between different objects or entities - relationships again defined in terms of space and time.
The function of logic for us humans, and indeed for all living organisms, is to establish relationships that are necessary in order for us to function as intentional beings. We set up goals, and analyze the world in order to get what we want. The logical operators are properties of spatiotemporal relationships. And, Or, If... Then and If And Only If each define different relationships that in turn give causal meaning to organisms trying to reach goals.
If logic cannot be understood other than as spatiotemporal relationships, and if logic is engaged when trying to establish causality in order to perform intentional behavior, should there not be a relationship between logic, causality and intention that moves above and beyond the spatiotemporal realm? That adds additional information except for that provided by physics?
I would argue that this is the case, and that what is missing is another vector. Space can be understood as three vectors, and time as one, making the mechanical spatiotemporal realm consist of four vectors. With these four vectors, there can be no causality. However, logic is engaged in finding relationships between these four vectors, implying a fifth, "logical vector". And this vector in turn is a necessary requirement in order for intentional behavior to come about.
If we assume a world of five vectors, the fifth being a "logic vector" of intentionality (subjective intentionality of a living organism, that is) which is necessary in order to understand spatiotemporal relationships when goal-directed individuals assume or establish causality, in my view a lot of misunderstandings are cleared up. Then it can be rightly understood that neither intention, nor causality, are objective spatiotemporal phenomena that can be explained by physics. They are subjective traits of living organisms. They have no extension in space or time and work as representations of space and time, or as representations of spatiotemporal relationships.
The property of this fifth dimension, or vector of intentionality, is logic. Hence, life is logic, or more correctly, life is a vector whose property is a logically derived representation of the spatiotemporal realm in order to infer causality, thereby making it possible to engage in goal-directed behavior.
Complicated? I'll try and see if I can clean up my argument a bit the next time I write about it. But I think that the main thrust holds. Also, I think that we know that it is true, and that we have to know that it is true in order to engage in social behavior. We try to infer the logical inferences of others and understand them as intentional constructs in order to coordinate our own behavior with that of others. We have just been unable to come up with a good description of what we do in language and mathematics. (On a side-note, the "theory of mind" which is a commonly known concept in psychology, is nothing else than a theory of intentional behavior, or an attempt to take the intentionality vector into account when making representations of the world).
What we need is to acknowledge another vector, or another dimension, if we ever want to understand life. Present-day physics won't do. For those of you who have read him, I think that Elliott Jaques could help us sort things out.
posted by Hugin at 09:50
<< Home