Towards System: From Computation to the Phenomenon of Language

Löfgren, Lars

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2991-3_6

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is language as a whole of complementary description and interpretation processes (cf Löfgren (1979Löfgren ( , 1981Löfgren ( , 1984Löfgren ( , 1988Löfgren ( , 1992Löfgren ( , 1993Löfgren ( , 1994Löfgren ( , 1998). …”

Section: The Complementaristic Comprehension Of Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 3 Understandings of time in complementaristic language

Löfgren¹

2000

Time in Contemporary Intellectual Thought

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Complementaristic Comprehension Of Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 3 Understandings of time in complementaristic language

Löfgren¹

2000

Time in Contemporary Intellectual Thought

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To argue this point for general languages, we refer to Löfgren (1988). In this general case we have to look into the nature of the object-enumeration process, and distinguish between two cases.…”

Section: The Tension Aspect Of the Linguistic Complementaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is the linguistic complementarity (see also Löfgren 1984Löfgren , 1988Löfgren , 1989, which refers to language as an ultimate whole, and its nonfragmentability within itself into parts, descriptions and interpretations -which may yet be fully described if a metalanguage is available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementarity in Language; Toward a General Understanding

Löfgren

1992

Nature, Cognition and System II

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Published in AbstractEver since its first conception in 1907 by Bergson, "complementarity" has come to represent extremely wholistic situations, for which fragmentability into parts turn out unsuccessful. In 1927, Bohr used the term complementarity within quantum mechanics, with profound consequences, for a principally unsuccessful fragmentability into independent observability and definability concepts.The paper objectifies language, in a very general understanding, as a complementaristic phenomenon. Language is thereby conceived as a whole of description and interpretation processes, such that fragmentation in these parts is in principle impossible within the language itself, but possible in a metalanguage if one such exists. The linguistic complementarity is an ultimate form to which particular complementarity conceptions can be reduced.In a basic understanding, the linguistic complementarity refers to the impossibility of describing the constituents of a language, its description and interpretation processes, in the language itself. As such, the complementarity obtains for every language, from genetic language over programming and formal languages, to external communication languages. The argument is based on a factual function of every language, namely to admit communication or control, whereby descriptions are bound to be finitely representable and static, whereas the corresponding interpretations may be infinite of any order as well as dynamic.Further understandings of the linguistic complementarity are developed by utilizing specific knowledge of languages. With reference to languages for formal set theories, we develop the complementarity as a tension between describability and interpretability. With reference to a processual function concept, with origins in recursive function theory and lambda calculus, we develop complementarity in terms of the unavoidable partiality of the self-references that a language may permit.The reducibility, to the linguistic complementarity, of the specific complementarity conceptions by Bergson and Bohr is investigated with positive results. For the reducibility of Bohr complementarity, as a tension between definability and observability, to the linguistic complementarity, as a tension between describability and interpretability within a language, we develop observability as interpretability in an observation language. Furthermore, we suggest that the self-reference problem for quantum mechanical measurement be naturally resolved in terms of the linguistic complementarity, thereby pointing at a possibility of developing linguistic models for quantum mechanics, for which mechanistic models do not suffice.

show abstract

“…(7) is realized for all the aspects <@> ~ @ we write (8) and we say that the entity r/A and the view @ do mutually exist, In both cases of relative existence (7) and (8) …”

Section: Relative Existence the Frame-principle Relative Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The definitions (2)-(4), (7), (8), express the fact that a view can qualify only an entity that can contribute by "abstraction" to the genesis of this view. The reflexive, double-way, zigzag dynamics which inextricably ties to one another the processes of abstraction and those of qualification, is here evoked in terms that explicate all the different and hierarchically related classes of relativities involved in the concepts of existence and of inexistence.…”

Section: Relative Existence the Frame-principle Relative Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spacetime quantum probabilities II: Relativized descriptions and Popperian propensities

Mugur-Schächter

1992

Found Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ReceivedIn the first part of this work t~l we have explicated the spacetime structure of the probabilistic organization of quantum mechanies. We have shown that each quantum mechanical state, in consequence of the spacetime characteristics of the epistemic operations by which the observer produces the state to be studied and the processes of qualification of these, brings in a tree-like spacetime structure, a "quantum mechanical probability tree," that transgresses the theory of probabilities as it now stands. In this second part we develop the general implications of these results.Starting from the lowest level of cognitive action and creating an appropriate symbolism, we construct a "relativizing epistemic syntax," a "general method of relativized conceptualization" where--systematically--each description is explicitly referred to the epistemic operations by which the observer produces the entity to be described and obtains qualifications of it. The method generates a typology of increasingly complex relativized descriptions where the question of realism admits of a particularly clear pronouncement. Inside this typology the epistemic processes that lie--UNIVERSALLY--at the basis of any conceptualization, reveal a tree-like spacetime structure. It appears in particular that the spacetime structure of the relativized representation of a probabilistic description, which transgresses the nowadays theory of probabilities, is the general mould of which the quantum mechanical probability trees are only particular realizations. This entails a clear definition of the descriptional status of quantum mechanics.While the recognition of the universal cognitive content of the quantum mechanical formalism opens up vistas toward mathematical developments of the relativizing epistemic syntax.The relativized representation of a probabilistic description leads with inner necessity to a "morphic" interpretation of probabilities that can be regarded as a formalized and deepening elaboration of Sir Karl Popper's "propensity" interpretation. A functional is then constructed, the "opacity functional," that associates a mathematical expression to the Popperian "propensities". Furthermore the opacity functional produces a deductive definition of Shannon's "in for-235 0015-9018/92/0200-0235506,50/0 ~') 1992 Plenum Publishing Corporation 236Mugur-Sch~chter mational entropy." Thereby there appears an explicitly unified relativized probabilistic-informational approach. This sketches out a second branch of a future mathematical epistemic syntax, to be connected with the branch stemming from quantum mechanics.The problem of the objectivity of probabilistic descriptions acquires certain precise rephrasings and--in a sense--solution.

show abstract

Towards System: From Computation to the Phenomenon of Language

Cited by 18 publications

References 19 publications

Chapter 3 Understandings of time in complementaristic language

Chapter 3 Understandings of time in complementaristic language

Complementarity in Language; Toward a General Understanding

Spacetime quantum probabilities II: Relativized descriptions and Popperian propensities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About