The previous post’s search for Turing + Dyson yielded a
quotation from Kierkegaard on possibility and necessity.
Further details —
See also . . .
The previous post’s search for Turing + Dyson yielded a
quotation from Kierkegaard on possibility and necessity.
Further details —
See also . . .
The previous post, on a Joyce symposium in
Utrecht on June 15-20, 2014, suggests a review
of this journal in June 2014. From June 21
of that year —
"Without the possibility that
an origin can be lost, forgotten,
or alienated into what springs
forth from it, an origin could
not be an origin. The possibility
of inscription is thus a necessary
possibility, one that must always
be possible."
— Page 157 of The Tain of the Mirror:
Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection ,
by Rodolphe Gasché, Harvard U. Press, 1986
Related art suggested by the above modal logic —
Robert Stone " 'That old Jew gave me this here.' Egan looked at the diamond. 'I ain't giving this to you, understand? The old man gave it to me for my boy. It's worth a whole lot of money– you can tell that just by looking– but it means something, I think. It's got a meaning, like.' 'Let's see,' Egan said, 'what would it mean?' He took hold of Pablo's hand cupping the stone and held his own hand under it. '"The jewel is in the lotus," perhaps that's what it means. The eternal in the temporal. The Boddhisattva declining nirvana out of compassion. Contemplating the ignorance of you and me, eh? That's a metaphor of our Buddhist friends.' Pablo's eyes glazed over. 'Holy shit,' he said. 'Santa Maria.' He stared at the diamond in his palm with passion. 'Hey,' he said to the priest, 'diamonds are forever! You heard of that, right? That means something, don't it?'
'I have heard it,' Egan said. 'Perhaps it has a religious meaning.' "
"We symbolize logical necessity — Keith Allen Korcz |
A mnemonic from a course titled
“Traditionally, there are two modalities, namely,
|
For less rigorous remarks, search Log24 for Modal Diamond Box.
A review of this date in 2005 —
Modal Theology
“We symbolize logical necessity
with the box ()
and logical possibility
with the diamond ().”
— Keith Allen Korcz
And what do we
symbolize by ?
For Tony Kushner fans:
For logic fans:
In the box-diamond notation, the axiom Searle quotes is
"The euclidean property guarantees the truth of this." — Wikipedia
Linking to Euclid
Clicking on "euclidean" above yields another Wikipedia article…
"In mathematics, Euclidean relations are a class of binary relations that satisfy a weakened form of transitivity that formalizes Euclid's 'Common Notion 1' in The Elements : things which equal the same thing also equal one another."
Verification: See, for instance, slides on modal logic at Carnegie Mellon University and modal logic at plato.stanford.edu.
Philosophical Investigations (1953)—
97. Thought is surrounded by a halo.
—Its essence, logic, presents an order,
in fact the a priori order of the world:
that is, the order of possibilities * ,
which must be common to both world and thought.
But this order, it seems, must be
utterly simple . It is prior to all experience,
must run through all experience;
no empirical cloudiness or uncertainty can be allowed to affect it
——It must rather be of the purest crystal.
But this crystal does not appear as an abstraction;
but as something concrete, indeed, as the most concrete,
as it were the hardest thing there is
(Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus No. 5.5563).
— Translation by G.E.M. Anscombe
All propositions of our colloquial language
are actually, just as they are, logically completely in order.
That simple thing which we ought to give here is not
a model of the truth but the complete truth itself.
(Our problems are not abstract but perhaps
the most concrete that there are.)
97. Das Denken ist mit einem Nimbus umgeben.
—Sein Wesen, die Logik, stellt eine Ordnung dar,
und zwar die Ordnung a priori der Welt,
d.i. die Ordnung der Möglichkeiten ,
die Welt und Denken gemeinsam sein muß.
Diese Ordnung aber, scheint es, muß
höchst einfach sein. Sie ist vor aller Erfahrung;
muß sich durch die ganze Erfahrung hindurchziehen;
ihr selbst darf keine erfahrungsmäßige Trübe oder Unsicherheit anhaften.
——Sie muß vielmehr vom reinsten Kristall sein.
Dieser Kristall aber erscheint nicht als eine Abstraktion;
sondern als etwas Konkretes, ja als das Konkreteste,
gleichsam Härteste . (Log. Phil. Abh. No. 5.5563.)
Related language in Łukasiewicz (1937)—
* Updates of 9:29 PM ET July 10, 2011—
A mnemonic from a course titled “Galois Connections and Modal Logics“—
“Traditionally, there are two modalities, namely, possibility and necessity.
The basic modal operators are usually written (square) for necessarily
and (diamond) for possibly. Then, for example, P can be read as
‘it is possibly the case that P .'”
See also Intensional Semantics , lecture notes by Kai von Fintel and Irene Heim, MIT, Spring 2007 edition—
“The diamond ⋄ symbol for possibility is due to C.I. Lewis, first introduced in Lewis & Langford (1932), but he made no use of a symbol for the dual combination ¬⋄¬. The dual symbol □ was later devised by F.B. Fitch and first appeared in print in 1946 in a paper by his doctoral student Barcan (1946). See footnote 425 of Hughes & Cresswell (1968). Another notation one finds is L for necessity and M for possibility, the latter from the German möglich ‘possible.’” Barcan, Ruth C.: 1946. “A Functional Calculus of First Order Based on Strict Implication.” Journal of Symbolic Logic, 11(1): 1–16. URL http://www.jstor.org/pss/2269159. Hughes, G.E. & Cresswell, M.J.: 1968. An Introduction to Modal Logic. London: Methuen. Lewis, Clarence Irving & Langford, Cooper Harold: 1932. Symbolic Logic. New York: Century. |
By Indirections
(Hamlet, II, i)
“Michael Taylor (1971)…. contends that the central conflict in Hamlet is between ‘man as victim of fate and as controller of his own destiny.'”– The Gale Group, Shakespearean Criticism, Vol. 71, at eNotes
Doonesbury today:
“Personality is a synthesis of possibility and necessity.”– Soren Kierkegaard
On Fate (Necessity),
Freedom (Possibility),
and Machine Personality–
Part I: Google as Skynet
George Dyson–
The Godel-to-Google Net [March 8, 2005]
A Cathedral for Turing [October 24, 2005]
Dyson: “The correspondence between Google and biology is not an analogy, it’s a fact of life.”
Part II: The Galois Connection
David Ellerman–
“A Theory of Adjoint Functors– with some Thoughts about their Philosophical Significance” (pdf) [November 15, 2005]
Ellerman: “Such a mechanism seems key to understanding how an organism can perceive and learn from its environment without being under the direct stimulus control of the environment– thus resolving the ancient conundrum of receiving an external determination while exercising self-determination.”
For a less technical version, see Ellerman’s “Adjoints and Emergence: Applications of a New Theory of Adjoint Functors” (pdf).
Ellerman was apparently a friend of, and a co-author with, Gian-Carlo Rota. His “theory of adjoint functors” is related to the standard mathematical concepts known as profunctors, distributors, and bimodules. The applications of his theory, however, seem to be less to mathematics itself than to a kind of philosophical poetry that seems rather closely related to the above metaphors of George Dyson. For a less poetic approach to related purely mathematical concepts, see, for instance, the survey Practical Foundations of Mathematics by Paul Taylor (Cambridge University Press, 1999). For less poetically appealing, but perhaps more perspicuous, extramathematical applications of category theory, see the work of, for instance, Joseph Goguen: Algebraic Semiotics and Information Integration, Databases, and Ontologies.
“The most prominent critic
of the modal notions is Quine.
Throughout his career, he has
argued against the use of notions
like necessity and possibility.”
— Michael J. Loux,
Note 1 of Chapter 5,
“The Necessary and the Possible,”
in Metaphysics:
A Contemporary Introduction
(Routledge, second edition,
January 1, 2002)
“Personality is a synthesis of
possibility and necessity.”
— Soren Kierkegaard,
The Sickness Unto Death
Related material:
Plato, Pegasus,
and the Evening Star
Diamonds Are Forever
Dream a Little Dream
Update of 3:45 PM:
From Arts & Letters Daily
this afternoon–
“Existentialism is not all gloom,
even if Heidegger looks pretty sour
in those photos. It’s a philosophy
that America needs now, says
the late Robert Solomon…
more … obit”
See also Jan. 2,
the date of
Solomon’s death
in Switzerland,
and click on the
following symbol
from that date:
(continued from
January 9, 2003)
George Balanchine
|
"What on earth is
a concrete universal?"
— Robert M. Pirsig
Review:
From Wikipedia's
"Upper Ontology"
and
Epiphany 2007:
"There is no neutral ground
that can serve as
a means of translating between
specialized (lower) ontologies."
There is, however,
"the field of reason"–
the 3×3 grid:
Click on grid
for details.
As Rosalind Krauss
has noted, some artists
regard the grid as
"a staircase to
the Universal."
Other artists regard
Epiphany itself as an
approach to
the Universal:
— Richard Kearney, 2005,
in The New Arcadia Review
Kearney (right) with
Martin Scorsese (left)
and Gregory Peck
in 1997.
— Richard Kearney, interview (pdf) in The Leuven Philosophy Newsletter, Vol. 14, 2005-2006
For more on "the possible," see Kearney's The God Who May Be, Diamonds Are Forever, and the conclusion of Mathematics and Narrative:
"We symbolize
logical necessity with the box and logical possibility with the diamond
"The possibilia that exist,
— Michael Sudduth, |
"For every kind of vampire,
there is a kind of cross."
— Thomas Pynchon
Click on picture for details.
Today is the feast
of St. Thomas Becket.
In his honor, a meditation
on tools and causation:
— Review by H. Allen Orr in
The New York Review of Books,
Vol. 54, No. 1, January 11, 2007
"An odd extension"–
Wolpert's title is, of course,
from Lewis Carroll.
Related material:
"It's a poor sort of memory
that only works backwards."
— Through the Looking-Glass
An event at the Kennedy Center
broadcast on
December 26, 2006
(St. Steven's Day):
(Log24, Aug. 22, 2005):
"At times, bullshit can
only be countered
with superior bullshit."
— Norman Mailer
"The concept of possible worlds dates back to at least Leibniz who in his Théodicée tries to justify the apparent imperfections of the world by claiming that it is optimal among all possible worlds. Voltaire satirized this view in his picaresque novel Candide….
Borges' seminal short story El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan ("The Garden of Forking Paths") is an early example of many worlds in fiction."
"Il faut cultiver notre jardin."
— Voltaire
"We symbolize
logical necessity
with the box
and logical possibility
with the diamond
"The possibilia that exist,
and out of which
the Universe arose,
are located in
a necessary being…."
— Michael Sudduth,
Notes on
God, Chance, and Necessity
by Keith Ward,
Regius Professor of Divinity,
Christ Church College, Oxford
(the home of Lewis Carroll)
For further details,
click on the
Christ Church diamond.
Adapted from the
cover of Alan Watts’s
The Spirit of Zen
Romani flag, courtesy of
myspace.com/RomArmando
Related material:
“The Scholar Gypsy”
in The Oxford Book
of English Prose, 1923,
edited by
Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch
This is available online:
From The Vanity of Dogmatizing,
by Joseph Glanvill
(London, printed by E.C. for
Henry Eversden at the Grey-Hound
in St.Pauls-Church-Yard, 1661)
Pages 195-201:
That one man should be able to bind the thoughts of another, and determine them to their particular objects; will be reckon’d in the first rank of Impossibles: Yet by the power of advanc’d Imagination it may very probably be effected; and story abounds with Instances. I’le trouble the Reader but with one; and the hands from which I had it, make me secure of the truth on’t. There was very lately a Lad in the University of Oxford, who being of very pregnant and ready parts, and yet wanting the encouragement of preferment; was by his poverty forc’d to leave his studies there, and to cast himself upon the wide world for a livelyhood. Now, his necessities growing dayly on him, and wanting the help of friends to relieve him; he was at last forced to joyn himself to a company of Vagabond Gypsies, whom occasionally he met with, and to follow their Trade for a maintenance. Among these extravagant people, and by the insinuating subtilty of his carriage, he quickly got so much of their love, and esteem; as that they discover’d to him their Mystery: in the practice of which, by the pregnancy of his wit and parts he soon grew so good a proficient, as to be able to out-do his Instructors. After he had been a pretty while exercis’d in the Trade; there chanc’d to ride by a couple of Scholars who had formerly bin of his acquaintance. The Scholars had quickly spyed out their old friend, among the Gypsies; and their amazement to see him among such society, had well-nigh discover’d him: but by a sign he prevented their owning him before that Crew: and taking one of them aside privately, desired him with his friend to go to an Inn, not far distant thence, promising there to come to them. They accordingly went thither, and he follows: after their first salutations, his friends enquire how he came to lead so odd a life as that was, and to joyn himself with such a cheating beggarly company. The Scholar-Gypsy having given them an account of the necessity, which drove him to that kind of life; told them, that the people he went with were not such Impostours as they were taken for, but that they had a traditional kind of learning among them, and could do wonders by the power of Imagination, and that himself had learnt much of their Art, and improved in further than themselves could. And to evince the truth of what he told them, he said, he’d remove into another room, leaving them to discourse together; and upon his return tell them the sum of what they had talked of: which accordingly he perform’d, giving them a full acount of what had pass’d between them in his absence. The Scholars being amaz’d at so unexpected a discovery, ernestly desir’d him to unriddle the mystery. In which he gave them satisfaction, by telling them, that what he did was by the power of Imagination, his Phancy binding theirs; and that himself had dictated to them the discourse, they held together, while he was from them: That there were warrantable wayes of heightening the Imagination to that pitch, as to bind anothers; and that when he had compass’d the whole secret, some parts of which he said he was yet ignorant of, he intended to give the world an account of what he had learned.
Now that this strange power of the Imagination is no Impossibility; the wonderful signatures in the Foetus caus’d by the Imagination of the Mother, is no contemptible Item. The sympathies of laughing & gaping together, are resolv’d into this Principle: and I see not why the phancy of one man may not determine the cogitation of another rightly qualified, as easily as his bodily motion. This influence seems to be no more unreasonable, then [sic] that of one string of a Lute upon another; when a stroak on it causeth a proportionable motion in the sympathizing confort, which is distant from it and not sensibly touched. Now if this notion be strictly verifiable; ’twill yeeld us a good account of how Angels inject thoughts into our minds, and know our cogitations: and here we may see the source of some kinds of fascination. If we are prejudic’d against the speculation, because we cannot conceive the manner of so strange an operation; we shall indeed receive no help from the common Philosophy: But yet the Hypothesis of a Mundane soul, lately reviv’d by that incomparable Platonist and Cartesian, Dr. H. More, will handsomely relieve us. Or if any would rather have a Mechanical account; I think it may probably be made out some such way as follow. Imagination is inward Sense. To Sense is required a motion of certain Filaments of the Brain; and consequently in Imagination there’s the like: they only differing in this, that the motion of the one proceeds immediately from external objects; but that of the other hath its immediate rise within us. Now then, when any part of the Brain is stringly agitated; that, which is next and most capable to receive the motive Impress, must in like manner be moved. Now we cannot conceive any thing more capable of motion, then the fluid matter, that’s interspers’d among all bodies, and contiguous to them. So then, the agitated parts of the Brain begetting a motion in the proxime Aether; it is propagated through the liquid medium, as we see the motion is which is caus’d by a stone thrown into the water. Now, when the thus moved matter meets with anything like that, from which it received its primary impress; it will proportionably move it, as it is in Musical strings tuned Unisons. And thus the motion being convey’d, from the Brain of one man to the Phancy of another; it is there receiv’d from the instrument of conveyance, the subtil matter; and the same kind of strings being moved, and much of whay after the same manner as in the first Imaginant; the Soul is awaken’d to the same apprehensions, as were they that caus’d them. I pretend not to any exactness or infallibility in this account, fore-seeing many scruples that must be removed to make it perfect: ‘Tis only a hint of the possibility of mechanically solving the Phaenomenon; though very likely it may require many other circumstances completely to make it out. But ’tis not my business here to follow it: I leave it therefore to receive accomplishment from maturer Inventions.
The Case
An entry suggested by today's New York Times story by Tom Zeller Jr., A Million Little Skeptics:
From The Hustler, by Walter Tevis:
The only light in the room was from the lamp over the couch where she was reading.
He looked at her face. She was very drunk. Her eyes were swollen, pink at the corners. "What's the book?" he said, trying to make his voice conversational. But it sounded loud in the room, and hard.
She blinked up at him, smiled sleepily, and said nothing.
"What's the book?" His voice had an edge now.
"Oh," she said. "It's Kierkegaard. Soren Kierkegaard." She pushed her legs out straight on the couch, stretching her feet. Her skirt fell back a few inches from her knees. He looked away.
"What's that?" he said.
"Well, I don't exactly know, myself." Her voice was soft and thick.
He turned his face away from her again, not knowing what he was angry with. "What does that mean, you don't know, yourself?"
She blinked at him. "It means, Eddie, that I don't exactly know what the book is about. Somebody told me to read it, once, and that's what I'm doing. Reading it."
He looked at her, tried to grin at her– the old, meaningless, automatic grin, the grin that made everybody like him– but he could not. "That's great," he said, and it came out with more irritation than he had intended.
She closed the book, tucked it beside her on the couch. "I guess this isn't your night, Eddie. Why don't we have a drink?"
"No." He did not like that, did not want her being nice to him, forgiving. Nor did he want a drink.
Her smile, her drunk, amused smile, did not change. "Then let's talk about something else," she said. "What about that case you have? What's in it?" Her voice was not prying, only friendly. "Pencils?"
"That's it," he said. "Pencils."
She raised her eyebrows slightly. Her voice seemed thick. "What's in it, Eddie?"
"Figure it out yourself." He tossed the case on the couch.
Related material:
Soren Kierkegaard on necessity and possibility
in The Sickness Unto Death, Chapter 3,
the Baseball Almanac,
and this morning's entry, "Natural Hustler."
Apostolos Doxiadis on last month's conference on "mathematics and narrative"–
Doxiadis is describing how talks by two noted mathematicians were related to
"… a sense of a 'general theory bubbling up' at the meeting… a general theory of the deeper relationship of mathematics to narrative…. "
Doxiadis says both talks had "a big hole in the middle."
"Both began by saying something like: 'I believe there is an important connection between story and mathematical thinking. So, my talk has two parts. [In one part] I’ll tell you a few things about proofs. [And in the other part] I’ll tell you about stories.' …. And in both talks it was in fact implied by a variation of the post hoc propter hoc, the principle of consecutiveness implying causality, that the two parts of the lectures were intimately related, the one somehow led directly to the other."
"And the hole?"
"This was exactly at the point of the link… [connecting math and narrative]… There is this very well-known Sidney Harris cartoon… where two huge arrays of formulas on a blackboard are connected by the sentence ‘THEN A MIRACLE OCCURS.’ And one of the two mathematicians standing before it points at this and tells the other: ‘I think you should be more explicit here at step two.’ Both… talks were one half fascinating expositions of lay narratology– in fact, I was exhilarated to hear the two most purely narratological talks at the meeting coming from number theorists!– and one half a discussion of a purely mathematical kind, the two parts separated by a conjunction roughly synonymous to ‘this is very similar to this.’ But the similarity was not clearly explained: the hole, you see, the ‘miracle.’ Of course, both [speakers]… are brilliant men, and honest too, and so they were very clear about the location of the hole, they did not try to fool us by saying that there was no hole where there was one."
"At times, bullshit can only be countered with superior bullshit."
— Norman Mailer
Many Worlds and Possible Worlds in Literature and Art, in Wikipedia:
"The concept of possible worlds dates back to a least Leibniz who in his Théodicée tries to justify the apparent imperfections of the world by claiming that it is optimal among all possible worlds. Voltaire satirized this view in his picaresque novel Candide….
Borges' seminal short story El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan ("The Garden of Forking Paths") is an early example of many worlds in fiction."
Background:
Modal Logic in Wikipedia
Possible Worlds in Wikipedia
Possible-Worlds Theory, by Marie-Laure Ryan
(entry for The Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory)
— Many Dimensions, by Charles Williams, 1931 (Eerdmans paperback, April 1979, pp. 43-44)
— Aion, by C. G. Jung, 1951 (Princeton paperback, 1979, p. 236)
"Its discoverer was of the opinion that he had produced the equivalent of the primordial protomatter which exploded into the Universe."
"We symbolize
logical necessity with the box and logical possibility with the diamond
"The possibilia that exist,
— Michael Sudduth, |
Matrix group actions,
March 26, 1985
"We symbolize logical necessity
with the box
and logical possibility
with the diamond
— Keith Allen Korcz,
(Log24.net, 1/25/05)
And what do we
symbolize by ?
"The possibilia that exist,
and out of which
the Universe arose,
are located in
a necessary being…."
— Michael Sudduth,
Notes on
God, Chance, and Necessity
by Keith Ward,
Regius Professor of Divinity
at Christ Church College, Oxford
(the home of Lewis Carroll)
Relativity Blues
Today, February 20, is the 19th anniversary of my note The Relativity Problem in Finite Geometry. Here is some related material.
In 1931, the Christian writer Charles Williams grappled with the theology of time, space, free will, and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (anticipating by many years the discussion of this topic by physicists beginning in the 1950's).
(Some pure mathematics — untainted by physics or theology — that is nevertheless related, if only by poetic analogy, to Williams's 1931 novel, Many Dimensions, is discussed in the above-mentioned note and in a generalization, Solomon's Cube.)
On the back cover of Williams's 1931 novel, the current publisher, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company of Grand Rapids, Michigan, makes the following statement:
"Replete with rich religious imagery, Many Dimensions explores the relation between predestination and free will as it depicts different human responses to redemptive transcendence."
One possible response to such statements was recently provided in some detail by a Princeton philosophy professor. See On Bullshit, by Harry G. Frankfurt, Princeton University Press, 2005.
A more thoughtful response would take into account the following:
1. The arguments presented in favor of philosopher John Calvin, who discussed predestination, in The Death of Adam: Essays on Modern Thought, by Marilynne Robinson
2. The physics underlying Einstein's remarks on free will, God, and dice
3. The physics underlying Rebecca Goldstein's novel Properties of Light and Paul Preuss's novels Secret Passages and Broken Symmetries
4. The physics underlying the recent so-called "free will theorem" of John Conway and Simon Kochen of Princeton University
5. The recent novel Gilead, by Marilynne Robinson, which deals not with philosophy, but with lives influenced by philosophy — indirectly, by the philosophy of the aforementioned John Calvin.
From a review of Gilead by Jane Vandenburgh:
"In The Death of Adam, Robinson shows Jean Cauvin to be the foremost prophet of humanism whose Protestant teachings against the hierarchies of the Roman church set in motion the intellectual movements that promoted widespread literacy among the middle and lower classes, led to both the American and French revolutions, and not only freed African slaves in the United States but brought about suffrage for women. It's odd then that through our culture's reverse historicism, the term 'Calvinism' has come to mean 'moralistic repression.'"
For more on what the Calvinist publishing firm Eerdmans calls "redemptive transcendence," see various July 2003 Log24.net entries. If these entries include a fair amount of what Princeton philosophers call bullshit, let the Princeton philosophers meditate on the summary of Harvard philosophy quoted here on November 5 of last year, as well as the remarks of November 5, 2003, and those of November 5, 2002.
From Many Dimensions (Eerdmans paperback, 1963, page 53):
"Lord Arglay had a suspicion that the Stone would be purely logical. Yes, he thought, but what, in that sense, were the rules of its pure logic?"
A recent answer:
"We symbolize logical necessity
with the box
and logical possibility
with the diamond
— Keith Allen Korcz,
(Log24.net, 1/25/05)
And what do we
symbolize by ?
"The possibilia that exist,
and out of which
the Universe arose,
are located in
a necessary being…."
— Michael Sudduth,
Notes on
God, Chance, and Necessity
by Keith Ward,
Regius Professor of Divinity
at Christ Church College, Oxford
(the home of Lewis Carroll)
"We symbolize logical necessity
with the box
and logical possibility
with the diamond
— Keith Allen Korcz,
(Log24.net, 1/25/05)
And what do we
symbolize by ?
On the Lapis Philosophorum,
the Philosophers' Stone –
"'What is this Stone?' Chloe asked….
'…It is told that, when the Merciful One
made the worlds, first of all He created
that Stone and gave it to the Divine One
whom the Jews call Shekinah,
and as she gazed upon it
the universes arose and had being.'"
– Many Dimensions,
by Charles Williams, 1931
(Eerdmans paperback,
April 1979, pp. 43-44)
"The lapis was thought of as a unity
and therefore often stands for
the prima materia in general."
– Aion, by C. G. Jung, 1951
(Princeton paperback,
1979, p. 236)
"Its discoverer was of the opinion that
he had produced the equivalent of
the primordial protomatter
which exploded into the Universe."
– The Stars My Destination,
by Alfred Bester, 1956
(Vintage hardcover,
July 1996, p. 216)
"The possibilia that exist,
and out of which
the Universe arose,
are located in
a necessary being…."
— Michael Sudduth,
Notes on
God, Chance, and Necessity
by Keith Ward,
Regius Professor of Divinity
at Christ Church College, Oxford
(the home of Lewis Carroll)
See also
The Diamond Archetype.
For more on modal theology, see
Kurt Gödel's Ontological Argument
and
The Ontological Argument
from Anselm to Gödel.
Diamonds Are Forever
Robert Stone,
A Flag for Sunrise:
" 'That old Jew gave me this here.' Egan looked at the diamond. 'I ain't giving this to you, understand? The old man gave it to me for my boy. It's worth a whole lot of money– you can tell that just by looking– but it means something, I think. It's got a meaning, like.'
'Let's see,' Egan said, 'what would it mean?' He took hold of Pablo's hand cupping the stone and held his own hand under it. '"The jewel is in the lotus," perhaps that's what it means. The eternal in the temporal. The Boddhisattva declining nirvana out of compassion. Contemplating the ignorance of you and me, eh? That's a metaphor of our Buddhist friends.'
Pablo's eyes glazed over. 'Holy shit,' he said. 'Santa Maria.' He stared at the diamond in his palm with passion.
'Hey,' he said to the priest, 'diamonds are forever! You heard of that, right? That means something, don't it?'
'I have heard it,' Egan said. 'Perhaps it has a religious meaning.' "
"We symbolize logical necessity
with the box
and logical possibility
with the diamond
From
DIALECTIC AND EXISTENCE
IN KIERKEGAARD AND KANT
Nythamar Fernandes de Oliveira
Pontifical Catholic University
at Porto Alegre, Brazil
"Such is the paradoxical 'encounter' of the eternal with the temporal. Just like the Moment of the Incarnation, when the Eternal entered the temporal, Kierkegaard refers to the category of the Instant (Danish Ojeblikket, 'a glance of the eye, eyeblink,' German Augenblick) as the dialectical kernel of our existential consciousness:
If the instant is posited, so is the eternal –but also the future, which comes again like the past … The concept around which everything turns in Christianity, the concept which makes all things new, is the fullness of time, is the instant as eternity, and yet this eternity is at once the future and the past.
Although I cannot examine here the Kierkegaardian conception of time, the dialectical articulation of time and existence, as can be seen, underlies his entire philosophy of existence, just as the opposition between 'eternity' and 'temporality': the instant, as 'an atom of eternity,' serves to restructure the whole synthesis of selfhood into a spiritual one, in man’s 'ascent' toward its Other and the Unknown. In the last analysis, the Eternal transcends every synthesis between eternity and time, infinity and finiteness, preserving not only the Absolute Paradox in itself but above all the wholly otherness of God. It is only because of the Eternal, therefore, that humans can still hope to attain their ultimate vocation of becoming a Chistian. As Kierkegaard writes in Works of Love (1847),
The possibility of the good is more than possibility, for it is the eternal. This is the basis of the fact that one who hopes can never be deceived, for to hope is to expect the possibility of the good; but the possibility of the good is eternal. …But if there is less love in him, there is also less of the eternal in him; but if there is less of the eternal in him, there is also less possibility, less awareness of possibility (for possibility appears through the temporal movement of the eternal within the eternal in a human being)."
The Diamond
of Possibility
"We symbolize logical necessity with the box
And what do we
symbolize by ?
Powered by WordPress