Saturday, November 06, 2004
On the nature of science and cultural Polemics
New discussion of CoreTalk and
data regularity in context à
From BCNGroup founding committee,
Dear friends,
We believe that it is appropriate that the development of version 19 of the Adi Readware ontology return notational conventions to a non-stratified form.
New beads [18] (modified and shorten) [19] (discussion of cultural differences) [20] (discussion of Churchland's' contributions) are offered at this point to close some lines of thematic expression and to point to way forward into the next d-GBG construction.
Our feeling here is that a non-stratified formalism is to be expressed as a single layer of organization of atoms, Q, and rules that identify the co-occurrence of these atoms as parts (not substructural atoms) but parts that are at the same level of reality as the occurrences. No notion of emergence will exist, and as a consequence this notation will not be stratified. The term “structured ontology” is still appropriate if this is a term that Adi wishes to use.
The Adi paradigm is grounded in the belief that there is only one created world, and such things as emergence are to be understand simply as a mere aspect of rearrangements of those things that are in the world, have been in the world and will be in the world as long as there is a created world.
The paradigm is absolutely consistent with both Christian and Islamic worldviews. I am not able to remember the Bahai writings well enough to state the Bahai worldview in this regards. My library is in storage, and I really do not have the resources at this time to create a picture of the scholarship here. The paradigm is not consistent with my understanding of Buddhist thought.