Winfried,
Much to think about in your message.
At this point I'd like to put "pressure" on your notion that "negation is
suppression," and ask you to consider that this position is at most a half
truth.
>>Suppose a listener or reader counters by saying that this thesis,
>>put forward as "truth," is actually an "error." Is such countering
>>pressure?
>Yes, I think it is. The target of an antithesis is - despite the word -
>not anti-thesis, but another concept with it's own right. The motivation
>for an antithesis to rise may be a sense of incompleteness, even error
>of thesis, but the antithesis in not simple negation (Communism is not
>simple Anit-Capitalism). Negation is suppression.
The Copernican thesis of a heliocentric universe is a negation of the
Ptolemaic view of the universe as anthropocentric, is it not? Is the
Copernican thesis suppression therefore?
And the Newtonian negation? Suppression?
And Einstein's negation of the Cartesian/Newtonian world view?
Suppression?
Sometimes, as in these examples, we are as you suggesting offering another
useful view as a counter to one partial view.
Sometimes, however, a negation cleases the world of an error: the world
can't be both flat and round.
In any event, you can't demonstrate the utility and truth of "entropy
production" by claiming that those who negate it are suppressing it.
I think that those who oppose civil rights for homosexuals should be free
to express their views. I intend to try to "negate" those views, not
suppress them.
Same for what I consider the profound error of trying to attribute
physical reality to such metaphors as entropy production.
That is: the term "pressure" as I use it is indeed a metaphor, and I
quickly admit as much when you "press" me.
Do you admit similarly that "entropy production" is not real, but is a
metaphor?
Be well.
Steve
--Steve Eskow <dreskow@corp.webb.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>