Re: [ontolog-forum] the justfication for chinese logic/mould theories

[ravi sharma <drravisharma@xxxxxxxxx>]

Paola and John

 

Greeat conversation. I will read links and yes people from different cultures and languages think differently but often reach same or similar knowledge paterns.

Two people do not have the same projection of model of universe or reality.

It is only in the overlap or intersection of these models that we can have knowledge sharing and collaboration and Mutual  understanding.

Some philosophies such as some of those from India project the World as Unreal as it is continuously changing and parts perishing etc, and conscious awareness as truth - reality. It requires deep metaphysical understanding of meaning (not shallow such as denial of this physical universe) rather as this might first appear.

 

Appreciate your efforts.

 

Would like to know how separable are language, culture and understanding?

 --
Thanks.
Ravi
(Dr. Ravi Sharma)
313 204 1740 Mobile

 

 

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John

to sum up some of the discussions we have had over this which have been lingering at the back of my head

1. from empirical observation based on my direct experience in different countries, I conjectured in various threads (posts dating back to 2007) that it looks to me that some people in some cultures think differently, pointing to this rather vague argument called 'there must be a chinese logic'

2. you and others argued that all logical systems are based on FOL (if I remember correctly) and that logical reasoning is not different between east and west

I have managed to do some reading on the subject (got on a train ride at last)

the book I pointed in another thread you commented on

>
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zVOWoXDunp8C&dq=complex+systems+logic&source=gbs_navlinks_s

: _Chaotic Logic: Language, Thought,
and Reality from the Perspective of Complex Systems Science_.
In this book, Ben Goertzel

contains lots of precious stuff for me


In particular, I think I have found some  justification for my argument above
on pages 94/96 and 97 in what is referred to as mould theories

Sapir-Whorf being one of these kinds
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/whorf.html

Mould theories represent language as 'a mould in terms of which thought categories are cast' (Bruner et al. 1956, p. 11


ie:  Language guides our categorization of the world

(Lot more in that book that is relevant to the discussions on semantics, meaning and the lot that we are having on this list
but maybe more comments later)

comment welcome
cheers
PDM








-
Paola Di Maio
**************************************************
“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.”
Albert Einstein
**************************************************


***************************************************


_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 

-- 
Thanks.
Ravi
(Dr. Ravi Sharma)
313 204 1740 Mobile
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)