In the same sense Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus exposes the limits of the world. The same I consider that on a multi-dimensional epistemological and ontological realm, we encounter overlapping conceptualizations, that in essence can add to The Sphere (that latent space of human's meaning, the one that is both alive and dead) but it also entangles and it creates undecidable riddles.
One would need to see if there are some classes of demarcations, and with that roughly identified, to create a framework with which we can escape a footing within different epistemological realms. An emphasis on a better guidance towards picking a more suitable frame of reference.
Demarcation Classes Framework
by Casian STEFAN, Principal Researcher at Essentia Mundi AI Lab. Contact: ai-AT-essentiamundi.com / ai.essentiamundi.com
Apr. 2024.
Please consider citation with link, if you derive work. Or contact me for collaboration. Thank you!
The framework consisting of classes of demarcations, that may serve as an untangling tool across epistemological realms.
A framework meant to guide a system against a frame of reference. In a more concrete space, we can see this as an inquiry to in which epistemological realm, a question can assert its answer.
The most of the interesting questions, looking very attractive, an anyone seems to have an answer. The origin, a centrality in the concept can be grasped, whereas the further meaning ramifications, in the multidimensionality of it, asserts different realms. It touches to maybe, incompatible epistemological realms, and ontological biases against the central concept too.
In case of simple questions to posit, like: "Does God exists?" we ought to first disentangle the question, and have some demarcations whether and in which realm this can even be considered a valid question.
A word is a compression, The Sphere is the projection of the totality of the compressions. The compression is a multi dimensional and dynamic vector of compressions. The Sphere is a latent space of overlapping epistemologies. A word can overlap in turn, also over other epistemologies that would undermine a validity of the original concept itself.
The working approaches:
- the Entscheidungsproblem encompasses the more general problem of deciding whether a given first-order sentence is entailed by a given finite set of sentences, but validity in first-order theories with infinitely many axioms cannot be directly reduced to the Entscheidungsproblem.
- axiomatic approach, halting problem perspective
- the Tractarian world view and Wittgenstein Demarcations
- the no causal nexus view
- complexity and the transcendence of the synergy (the undoing of it - no components to point to, the limitation, when complexity is high, to decipher the causal connections that leads to systems synergy.)
- the view through the glasses of Symbols as the latent spaces of meaning. A way to disentangle the Symbols, validate it's position relative to a reference frame.
- working with the Symbols that are within a frame of reference. Defining frames of reference relative to Symbols within Domains. Epistemological realms within the refined Domains.
- Acknowledge that within a frame of reference one cannot transcend itself without Observer's change of view. The validity of the change.
- The top Observer, within all its Symbols, is the human observer. It can apply only down the road further meaning to systems, through its Observer's view. It can't define itself completely, though.
- Acknowledge of the incompleteness of the self, of the human Observer. Would not attempt to define a consciousness of self. Only a consciousness of other, under itself, systems.
[to continue]
_____________________________________
Exploration by C. Stefan, Apr. 2024 [about]
Last update: May. 2024 (versions: v0.2.3) [versions]
"Essentia Mundi" AI Research Lab. [home]
Copyright © 2024 AI.EssentiaMundi.com, all rights reserved.
_
References:
C. Stefan - The World as the Totality of Symbols [here]
C. Stefan - Growing in an Environment does not call for Consciousness per se [here]
