Part 11: Seldon’s Insights Series -- Necessary 'Ordinality' -- Axiomatic versus Physical.

Part 11:  Seldon’s Insights Series -- Necessary 'Ordinality' -- Axiomatic versus Physical.

Dear Reader,

It is my pleasure, and my honor, as an Officer of the Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.] Office of Public Liaison, to share with you, from time to time, as they are approved for public release by the F.E.D. General Council, key excerpts from the internal writings, and from the internal sayings, of our co-founder, Karl Seldon.

The eleventh such release in this new series is entered below [Some E.D. standard edits have been applied, in the version presented below, to the direct transcript of our co-founder’s discourse].

For more information regarding, and for [further] instantiations of, these Seldonian insights, see --

www.dialectics.info

http://www.dialectics.info/dialectics/Applications.html

ENJOY!

Regards,

Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],

Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,

Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.

“...The necessary ‘consecutivity’ -- the necessity of the strict ‘ordinality’ -- of the “Natural Numbers”, N  = {1, 2, 3, ...}, of the, “first order”, “Natural Arithmetic”, which also forms the foundation of our _NQ_ ‘first dialectical arithmetic’ as a “non-standard model” thereof, is an axiomatic, conceptual necessity.  It is imposed as a net implication of the four, “first order axioms” of that axioms-system of arithmetics.”

“The necessary ‘consecutivity’ -- the ‘ordinality’ as “order of appearance” [cf. Chardin] in natural history -- of the monadic contents represented by the eleven extant, primary ontological categories of our cosmos, of ‘‘‘the dialectic of nature’’’, is a “mere” physical necessity.”

“But the latter form of necessity is, for all that, no less strict than the former.  Far from it.”

“Given the «aufheben», dialectical, ‘meta-monad-ological’ content-structure of the mounting material monads of this cosmos, that necessary ‘ordinality’ is of the following form:  the monads of ‘cosmo-ontological category’ y cannot [be]come -- cannot come into sustained existence -- before the monads of ‘cosmo-ontological category’ x, because the monads of ‘cosmo-ontological category’ y are MADE OF some of the former monads of ‘cosmo-ontological category’ x.”

“Composite bosons and fermions cannot come into sustained, populous existence before “non-composite” bosons and fermions, because the former are MADE OF the latter.”

“I.e., mesons and protons and neutrons and hyperons cannot come into sustained, populous existence before gluons and quarks do, because the former are MADE OF the latter.”

“atomic nuclei cannot come into sustained, populous existence before protons and neutrons do, because the former are MADE OF the latter.”

“molecules cannot be[come] before atoms because molecules are MADE OF atoms.”

“prokaryotic living cells cannot [be]come before molecules, because prokaryotes are MADE OF molecules.”

“eukaryotic living cells cannot come before prokaryotic living cells, because eukaryotic living cells are, in part, MADE OF [vestigial] prokaryotic living cells [e.g., mitochondria and chloroplasts].”

 “ “multicellular organisms” cannot come before eukaryotic living cells, because such multicellular organisms are MADE OF eukaryotic living cells.”

“And so on.”

“This pervasive, «aufheben» architectonic, and the physical ‘ordinality’ to which it gives rise, at all taxonomic, systematic levels of ‘the self-constitution of our cosmos’, is the reason why the ‘qualitative axiomatic ordinality’ of the _NQ_ ‘meta-numbers’ can capture, algebraically, and thus model, the physical, ‘ontological ordinality’ of our Universe, as of its many ‘subⁿ-universes’.”