Organicist (universal) laws
Konstantin
Roman has put forward an interesting (essential) issue. Indeed, we
have and use physicalist (universal) laws but, still, we do not have
Organicist (universal) laws. Biocosmology exactly deals with this
actual issue.
=
In my paper “All-Embracing (Triune) Medicine of the Individual’s
Health: A Biocosmological Perspective” - http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/14-4/A04.pdf
- I have made an attempt to define 16 universal laws of this kind
(which are fully equal in their significance to the Gravity law, but
which are active in the organic sphere).
=
“Twelfth is the Biocosmological realistic self-identity of every
subject of life – that is a direct rational conclusion from the fact
of the cosmic origin and integrated essence of every process of the
life on Earth; this truth is confirmed by biological data – every
molecule, cell, biological organ, organism has the predetermined
inherent functionalist destination (that is realized by the subject it/
her/himself), as well as sociological and psychological investigations
(the main psychological theories: by Freud, Pavlov, Watson, Jung,
Ukhtomsky, Maslow, etc.,) – disclose the internal determinancy
(driving forces) of vital activity of a person.”
-=
Of course, herein, in respect of civilizational development, - the
greatest contribution was made by Nikolay Danilevsky in the work
“Russia and Europe”. However, this work is still without a serious
scientific study, including the big influence - negative and
groundless critique - of the Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev in
the 1890s (already after the death of Danilevsky).
--=
The main conclusion of the Danilevsky’s theory – Each civilization has
its own specific ontogenesis (which has the cyclic essence) and is not
reduced to common laws.
--=
My best,
Konstantin
Georges Chapouthier
and the (universal) laws of biology (complex systems) is indeed a very
important question to further study.
Best,
Georges Chapouthier
----- Original Message -----
From: "Konstantin" <hru...@gmail.com>
To: "Biocosmology" <Biocos...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "Roman E. Zinchenko" <zinc...@self-organization.ru>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 8:05 AM
Subject: Organicist (universal) laws
Dear Roman and Kayo, Good morning!
Roman has put forward an interesting (essential) issue. Indeed, we
have and use physicalist (universal) laws but, still, we do not have
Organicist (universal) laws. Biocosmology exactly deals with this
actual issue.
=
In my paper �All-Embracing (Triune) Medicine of the Individual�s
Health: A Biocosmological Perspective� -
http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/14-4/A04.pdf
- I have made an attempt to define 16 universal laws of this kind
(which are fully equal in their significance to the Gravity law, but
which are active in the organic sphere).
=
�Twelfth is the Biocosmological realistic self-identity of every
subject of life � that is a direct rational conclusion from the fact
of the cosmic origin and integrated essence of every process of the
life on Earth; this truth is confirmed by biological data � every
molecule, cell, biological organ, organism has the predetermined
inherent functionalist destination (that is realized by the subject it/
her/himself), as well as sociological and psychological investigations
(the main psychological theories: by Freud, Pavlov, Watson, Jung,
Ukhtomsky, Maslow, etc.,) � disclose the internal determinancy
(driving forces) of vital activity of a person.�
-=
Of course, herein, in respect of civilizational development, - the
greatest contribution was made by Nikolay Danilevsky in the work
�Russia and Europe�. However, this work is still without a serious
scientific study, including the big influence - negative and
groundless critique - of the Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev in
the 1890s (already after the death of Danilevsky).
--=
The main conclusion of the Danilevsky�s theory � Each civilization has
Konstantin Hrucki
Georges: Greetings from Veliky Novgorod!
I sincerely appreciate your point of view.
My best,
Konstantin
Yes, this adequacy between the (universal) laws of physics (simple systems) and the (universal) laws of biology (complex systems) is indeed a very important question to further study.
Best,
Georges Chapouthier
----- Original Message ----- From: "Konstantin" <hru...@gmail.com>
To: "Biocosmology" <Biocos...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "Roman E. Zinchenko" <zinchenko@self-organization.ru>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 8:05 AM
Subject: Organicist (universal) laws
Dear Roman and Kayo, Good morning!
Roman has put forward an interesting (essential) issue. Indeed, we
have and use physicalist (universal) laws but, still, we do not have
Organicist (universal) laws. Biocosmology exactly deals with this
actual issue.
=
In my paper “All-Embracing (Triune) Medicine of the Individual’s
Health: A Biocosmological Perspective” - http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/14-4/A04.pdf
- I have made an attempt to define 16 universal laws of this kind
(which are fully equal in their significance to the Gravity law, but
which are active in the organic sphere).
=
“Twelfth is the Biocosmological realistic self-identity of every
subject of life – that is a direct rational conclusion from the fact
of the cosmic origin and integrated essence of every process of the
life on Earth; this truth is confirmed by biological data – every
molecule, cell, biological organ, organism has the predetermined
inherent functionalist destination (that is realized by the subject it/
her/himself), as well as sociological and psychological investigations
(the main psychological theories: by Freud, Pavlov, Watson, Jung,
Ukhtomsky, Maslow, etc.,) – disclose the internal determinancy
(driving forces) of vital activity of a person.”
-=
Of course, herein, in respect of civilizational development, - the
greatest contribution was made by Nikolay Danilevsky in the work
“Russia and Europe”. However, this work is still without a serious
scientific study, including the big influence - negative and
groundless critique - of the Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev in
the 1890s (already after the death of Danilevsky).
--=
The main conclusion of the Danilevsky’s theory – Each civilization has
Konstantin Hrucki
Georges: Greetings from Veliky Novgorod!
I sincerely appreciate your point of view.
My best,
Konstantin
Yes, this adequacy between the (universal) laws of physics (simple systems) and the (universal) laws of biology (complex systems) is indeed a very important question to further study.
Best,
Georges Chapouthier
----- Original Message ----- From: "Konstantin" <hru...@gmail.com>
To: "Biocosmology" <Biocos...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "Roman E. Zinchenko" <zinchenko@self-organization.ru>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 8:05 AM
Subject: Organicist (universal) laws
Dear Roman and Kayo, Good morning!
Roman has put forward an interesting (essential) issue. Indeed, we
have and use physicalist (universal) laws but, still, we do not have
Organicist (universal) laws. Biocosmology exactly deals with this
actual issue.
=
In my paper “All-Embracing (Triune) Medicine of the Individual’s
Health: A Biocosmological Perspective” - http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/14-4/A04.pdf
- I have made an attempt to define 16 universal laws of this kind
(which are fully equal in their significance to the Gravity law, but
which are active in the organic sphere).
=
“Twelfth is the Biocosmological realistic self-identity of every
subject of life – that is a direct rational conclusion from the fact
of the cosmic origin and integrated essence of every process of the
life on Earth; this truth is confirmed by biological data – every
molecule, cell, biological organ, organism has the predetermined
inherent functionalist destination (that is realized by the subject it/
her/himself), as well as sociological and psychological investigations
(the main psychological theories: by Freud, Pavlov, Watson, Jung,
Ukhtomsky, Maslow, etc.,) – disclose the internal determinancy
(driving forces) of vital activity of a person.”
-=
Of course, herein, in respect of civilizational development, - the
greatest contribution was made by Nikolay Danilevsky in the work
“Russia and Europe”. However, this work is still without a serious
scientific study, including the big influence - negative and
groundless critique - of the Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev in
the 1890s (already after the death of Danilevsky).
--=
The main conclusion of the Danilevsky’s theory – Each civilization has
Yevgen Smotrytskyy
Kayo Uejima
I thank for your valuable message from my heart.
Certainly, your organic perspective is very important for the future.
I expect that Biocosmology can guide shift of society to circulative
process.
I always try to take into consideration with organic viewpoint that we
can observe adequacy between the (universal) laws of physics (simple
systems) and the (universal) laws of biology (complex systems)in
society
best wishes
Kayo Uejima
Roman Zinchenko
Dear Konstantin, Kayo and All!
I would like to continue very essential issue which we began to discuss some time ago.
First of all I would like to notice that physicalist laws of dynamic systems (Newton – Laplace laws) subjected to shock in 1889, when Poincaré in his famous theorem proved scientifically that in general case dynamic systems are not integrable. This means that in case of 2 objects (i.e., the Earth – the Sun) the laws of classical dynamics are applicable, but in case of 3 or more objects the laws of classical dynamics are not applicable! Due to this our world (universe) cannot be described by physicalist laws of dynamic systems and therefore we need absolutely new laws for description of temporal evolution of unintegrable chaotic systems (including Universe in whole).
Exactly disclosing the new laws was in the center of scientific research in XX century, and beginning with the works by Poincaré, Einstein, Turing, Lorenz, Kolmogorov, etc. the science came up to interdisciplinary synergetic approach developed by H. Haken, I. Prigogine, S.P. Kurdyumov, F. Varela, U. Maturana etc. In contrast to the Newton–Laplace linear dynamics the new interdisciplinary approach is called nonlinear dynamics. Klaus Mainzer (University of Augsburg, Germany) says the following about nonlinear dynamics: «Nonlinear dynamics leads not only to chaos, but also it promotes self-organization, emergence order in complex systems. By means of mathematical analysis self-organization and emergent origin of order can be reduced to nonlinear cyclic causality which determines the character of interaction between elements inside the system. Used mathematical methods taken separately are independent from application and interpretation of main concepts. The crucial is the interpretation of the methods in concrete application. That’s why interdisciplinary usage of them is impossible to mean as phisicalism».
So, methods (incl. mathematical) of nonlinear dynamics and synergetics for study of complex systems of different nature (natural, social, economic, etc.) are impossible to mean as phisicalism because of scientific research of instabilities, the processes of self-organization, and also because of examples of irredundant probabilistic description which is applicable to chaotic systems. It is obvious that in case of synergetic interdisciplinary approach to the study of complex nonlinear systems (systems which are far away from equilibrium) there are no talks about phisicalism by definition!
But what is it then? Is it Organicism? Can synergetics and nonlinear dynamics studying self-organization in complex system of different nature be named Organicism? And can we name synergetic laws of temporal evolution of complex nonlinear non-equilibrium self-organizing systems as Organicist universal laws?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Уважаемые Константин, Кайо и коллеги!
Я хотел бы продолжить очень важную тему, затронутую нами некоторое время назад.
Прежде всего, хотел бы отметить, что физикалистские законы динамических систем (законы Ньютона – Лапласа) были подвергнуты серьезному удару еще в 1889 году, когда Пуанкаре в своей фундаментальной теореме доказал, что в общем случае динамические системы не интегрируемы. А это означает, что в случае 2-х тел (например, Земля – Солнце) законы классической динамики применимы, а в случае 3-х тел и более – нет. Поэтому наш мир (вселенная) не может быть описан физикалистскими законами динамических систем, и, следовательно, необходимы совершенно другие законы для описания временной эволюции неинтегрируемых хаотических систем, коей и является вселенная.
Именно в этом направлении и развивалась научная мысль в 20 веке, и в результате – через труды Пуанкаре, Эйнштейна, Лоренца, Тьюринга, Колмогорова, Арнольда и др. – мы пришли к междисциплинарным синергетическим подходам, развитым Г. Хакеном, И. Пригожиным, С.П. Курдюмовым, Ф. Варелой, У. Матураной и т.д. В противовес Ньютоновско-Лапласовской линейной динамике, новый междисциплинарный подход называется нелинейная динамика. Вот как характеризует нелинейную динамику Клаус Майнцер (профессор кафедры философии и теории науки, Институт междисциплинарной информатики, Университет Аугсбурга, Германия): «Однако нелинейная динамика ведет не только к хаосу, но и способствует самоорганизации, возникновению порядка в сложных системах. Средствами математического анализа самоорганизация и эмерджентное возникновение порядка могут быть сведены к нелинейной циклической причинности, определяющей характер взаимодействия элементов внутри системы. Используемые для этого математические методы, взятые сами по себе, независимы от применения и интерпретации основных понятий. Решающее значение имеет интерпретация этих методов в конкретных приложениях. Поэтому их междисциплинарное применение нельзя рассматривать как физикализм».
Таким образом, методы (в т.ч. математические) нелинейной динамики и синергетики для исследования сложных систем разной природы (естественные, социальные, экономические и др.) нельзя рассматривать как физикализм в виду их очевидных особенностей, в т.ч. из-за исследования неустойчивостей, процессов самоорганизации, а также наличия примеров несводимого вероятностного описания, применимого к хаотическим системам. Очевидно, что в случае синергетического междисциплинарного подхода к исследованию сложных нелинейных систем, находящихся вдали от равновесия, ни о каком физикализме речи идти не может по определению!
Но тогда что же этого такое? Органицизм? Является ли синергетика и нелинейная динамика, изучающие самоорганизацию в сложных системах различной природы, организцизмом? И можем ли мы принять синергетические законы временной эволюции сложных нелинейных неравновесных самоорганизующихся систем за органицистские универсальные законы?
Vitaliy Sholokhov
On 7/18/12, Roman Zinchenko <zr.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Konstantin, Kayo and All!
>
> I would like to continue very essential issue which we began to discuss
> some time ago.
>
> First of all I would like to notice that physicalist laws of dynamic
> systems (Newton – Laplace laws) subjected to shock in 1889, when Poincaré
> in his famous theorem proved scientifically that in general case dynamic
> systems are *not integrable*. This means that in case of 2 objects (i.e.,
> the Earth – the Sun) the laws of classical dynamics are applicable, but in
> case of 3 or more objects the laws of classical dynamics are not
> applicable! Due to this our world (universe) cannot be described by
> physicalist laws of dynamic systems and therefore we need absolutely new
> laws for description of temporal evolution of unintegrable chaotic systems
> (including Universe in whole).
>
> Exactly disclosing the new laws was in the center of scientific research in
> XX century, and beginning with the works by Poincaré, Einstein, Turing,
> Lorenz, Kolmogorov, etc. the science came up to interdisciplinary
> synergetic approach developed by H. Haken, I. Prigogine, S.P. Kurdyumov, F.
> Varela, U. Maturana etc. In contrast to the Newton–Laplace linear dynamics
> the new interdisciplinary approach is called *nonlinear dynamics*. Klaus
> Mainzer (University of Augsburg, Germany) says the following about
> nonlinear dynamics: «Nonlinear dynamics leads not only to chaos, but also
> it promotes self-organization, emergence order in complex systems. By means
> of mathematical analysis self-organization and emergent origin of order can
> be reduced to nonlinear cyclic causality which determines the character of
> interaction between elements inside the system. Used mathematical methods
> taken separately are independent from application and interpretation of
> main concepts. The crucial is the interpretation of the methods in concrete
> application. That’s why interdisciplinary usage of them *is impossible to
> mean as phisicalism*».
>
> So, methods (incl. mathematical) of nonlinear dynamics and synergetics for
> study of complex systems of different nature (natural, social, economic,
> etc.) are impossible to mean as phisicalism because of scientific research
> of instabilities, the processes of self-organization, and also because of
> examples of irredundant probabilistic description which is applicable to
> chaotic systems. It is obvious that in case of synergetic interdisciplinary
> approach to the study of complex nonlinear systems (systems which are far
> away from equilibrium) there are no talks about phisicalism by definition!
>
> But what is it then? Is it Organicism? Can synergetics and nonlinear
> dynamics studying self-organization in complex system of different nature
> be named Organicism? And can we name synergetic laws of temporal evolution
> of complex nonlinear non-equilibrium self-organizing systems as Organicist
> universal laws?
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Уважаемые Константин, Кайо и коллеги!
>
> Я хотел бы продолжить очень важную тему, затронутую нами некоторое время
> назад.
>
> Прежде всего, хотел бы отметить, что физикалистские законы динамических
> систем (законы Ньютона – Лапласа) были подвергнуты серьезному удару еще в
> 1889 году, когда Пуанкаре в своей фундаментальной теореме доказал, что в
> общем случае динамические системы *не интегрируемы*. А это означает, что в
> случае 2-х тел (например, Земля – Солнце) законы классической динамики
> применимы, а в случае 3-х тел и более – *нет*. Поэтому наш мир (вселенная)
> не может быть описан физикалистскими законами динамических систем, и,
> следовательно, необходимы совершенно другие законы для описания временн*о*й
> эволюции неинтегрируемых хаотических систем, коей и является вселенная.
>
> Именно в этом направлении и развивалась научная мысль в 20 веке, и в
> результате – через труды Пуанкаре, Эйнштейна, Лоренца, Тьюринга,
> Колмогорова, Арнольда и др. – мы пришли к междисциплинарным синергетическим
> подходам, развитым Г. Хакеном, И. Пригожиным, С.П. Курдюмовым, Ф. Варелой,
> У. Матураной и т.д. В противовес Ньютоновско-Лапласовской линейной
> динамике, новый междисциплинарный подход называется *нелинейная динамика*.
> Вот как характеризует нелинейную динамику Клаус Майнцер (профессор кафедры
> философии и теории науки, Институт междисциплинарной информатики,
> Университет Аугсбурга, Германия): «Однако нелинейная динамика ведет не
> только к хаосу, но и способствует самоорганизации, возникновению порядка в
> сложных системах. Средствами математического анализа самоорганизация и
> эмерджентное возникновение порядка могут быть сведены к нелинейной
> циклической причинности, определяющей характер взаимодействия элементов
> внутри системы. Используемые для этого математические методы, взятые сами
> по себе, независимы от применения и интерпретации основных понятий.
> Решающее значение имеет интерпретация этих методов в конкретных
> приложениях. Поэтому их междисциплинарное применение *нельзя рассматривать
> как физикализм*».