Heidegger

Joe:

A Possible or Impossible Favour - off-list or on?

If you have time and are disposed to do so, could you please put my argument
(in blue below) for the manifestation of materio-possibilia into some sort
of logical form? I would be grateful if you could. If it is (a) too
complicated. (b) Inconvenient. (c) too boring. (d) too time-consuming, just tell
me, I will understand and not be at all miffed.

Cheers,

Jud.

My most basic concept of what I call eliminative determinism, which combines
elements of both Necessitarian and Regularism Theory and holds that the
philosophical tradition of characterising individual events as the result of a a
necessary causation (cause and effect) reflects our human-centred
preoccupation with the unpredictable vagaries of the constantly changing universe.
Thus it is that we attribute an authoritarian, law-applying agential order, such
as God or The Laws of Nature in an effort to combat our vague suspicions of
finding ourselves cast into a chaotic universe. The belief in such a
theological or cosmic ascendancy (The Laws of Nature) provides an assurance that
someone or something is in control. Such faith or belief bestows relief.
The surety of an authority-concept frees us from ontological ignorance and
doubt. There is a lessening of the angst and dreaded uncertainty, which the
thought of a cold, lawless, incomprehensible chaotic universe engenders.

MY CLAIM
(1) *That which is necessarily materially possible* (*that which exists,*
henceforth referred to as: *materio-possibilia*) is verifiably manifested in
the physical concrecity of the existing objects to be found in the cosmos.
(2) Such an epistemically verifiable claim for the realisation of such
materio-possibilia is also a subjunctively or alethically attained verity in that
my claim must essentially be true as demonstrated by the occurrence of
existents themselves, including me. (I am materially possible - therefore I
exist.)
(3) If my claim were to be untrue, then (counterfactually speaking) the
cosmos would consist of physical-impossibilia, which were incapable of being
incorporated as elements of any covering or natural law, with the concomitant
chaos that would obtain - I would not have written this and you would not be
reading it.
(4) As that which is epistemically proved valid by the realisation of its
own physical materialisation (i.e. including our autopoietic selves, who can
only procreate materio-possibilia rather than physical-impossibilia, and the
other physically manifested materio-possibilia to be found in the cosmos)
that means that the reality of the cosmos equals the possible objects of
which it consists.
(5) Thus the cosmos constitutes the self-governed immensity which is
regulated by the compendium of possibility-governed actualised products of
materio-existential possibility – the ever-changing cosmic holon itself.

Posted on Sunday, May 11th, 2008 at 6:04 am
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback