Wave-Particle Duality Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [8]

Edelman (1992: 215):

Quantum theory is the most generally applicable of all theories. In dealing with enormous energies and very small particles, this theory has revealed behaviour that confounds ordinary expectations. For example, one particle cannot be identified as distinguishable from another. Particles show duality of behaviour: Under one set of circumstances they are best described as waves, in others as particles. Indeed, as Max Born first suggested, the fundamental wave function ψ in the Schrödinger wave equation, when taken as an absolute value and squared, is a measure of the probability of finding a particle in a given position of space — anywhere!

Blogger Comments:

As previously explained, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics, wave-particle duality is the duality of potential and instance.  Probability measures potential (wave), statistical frequency measures instances of that potential (particles).

The Epistemology Of Physics Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 214-5):

But let me sketch out one aspect of the quantum measurement problem to show why these scientists were tempted to bring consciousness in to physics. As I do so, however, please keep in mind that physics is concerned with formal correlations of the most general properties of things in spacetime. Theories of physics are not concerned with the senses proper, with categorising nameable macroscopic objects, or with intentionality. If one delves into quantum mechanics, it is easy to forget these restrictions, because the decisions of the observer appear to affect the measurements he or she makes. To understand this, we have to consider a few salient features of quantum theory.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the reason why theories of physics are not concerned with 'the senses proper' is because they are founded on the Galilean assumption that scientific inquiry is concerned only with the material-relational domain of meaning ('primary qualities'), and not the mental-verbal domain ('secondary qualities').

However, what quantum mechanics demonstrates is that the mental-verbal domain cannot be ignored, since it is this that construes experience as the meaning of the material-relational domain.

The Intervention Of Consciousness In Quantum Measurement Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 214):

Such notions of physics, with their generality and predictive power, are beguiling. As powerful as they are, however, profound problems arise in understanding their application. An example comes from the theory of quantum measurement, which must be taken into account when one attempts to measure the position or momentum of a fundamental particle. In facing the paradoxes that arise from these attempts, distinguished mathematicians such as John von Neumann and equally distinguished physicists such as Eugene Wigner were tempted to propose that consciousness itself causally intervenes in the process of quantum measurement.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, in quantum measurement, the participation ('intervenes') of consciousness is not as agent ('causally'), but as the medium of a process of the mental-verbal domain that construes experience as an instance of meaning potential of the material-relational domain.

(Critiques Of) Berkeley's Idealism Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 212):

Such a position [panpsychism] "scientises" another view originally based on the philosophy of idealism. In it the world is perceived only through the mind and thus perhaps, as Bishop Berkeley proposed, there is no matter, only mind. On hearing this, Dr. Johnson kicked a stone and stated, "I refute it thus." A better refutation comes from the theory of evolution: If natural selection gives rise to sentient animals, it is difficult to see how the selecting environment and the brain can both be mental events in a single sentient animal that also has progeny undergoing natural selection. The mind reels trying to comprehend how such a complication would ever come to pass.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, both matter and mind are construals of experience as meaning: the material-relational domain and the mental-material domain.

A stone is a construal of experience as first-order meaning of the material-relational domain, whereas "I refute it thus" is construal of experience as second-order wording: a projected locution of the mental-verbal domain.

However, whereas the brain is also a construal of experience as first-order meaning of the material-relational domain (data), the selecting environment is a reconstrual of first-order meaning of the material-relational domain as meaning of the language of evolutionary biology (theory).

The Place Of Conscious Observers In Scientific Descriptions Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 209):

The solution to the problem of how we know, feel, and are aware is not contained in a philosophical sentence, however profound. It must emerge from an understanding of how biological systems and relationships evolved in the physical world. 

When that evolution resulted in language, the imaginable world became infinite. There is great beauty and much hope in the realisation of this open-endedness of imagination. But we must continually return from that world to the world of matter if we are to see how as conscious observers we are actually placed within our own descriptions. Analysing that placement will be one of the major goals of the science of the future.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the world of matter is the world of the material-relational domain of first-order meaning (phenomena), whereas the world of imagination is the world of second-order meaning (metaphenomena): the projected ideas and locutions of the symbolic processing of the mental-verbal domain.

The place of the conscious observer in scientific descriptions is as the mental-verbal medium through which the meaning of language, construed of experience, is reconstrued as the meaning of the language of science.

Because the mental-verbal domain ('secondary qualities') is not the concern of Galilean science, it is limited to understanding the place of conscious observers in its descriptions only in material-relational terms.

The Evolution Of Science Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 207-8):

Memory underlies meaning. With the transformation of meaning made possible by the embodiment of concepts as described by the TNGS, it became possible within human cultural history to develop true information-processing systems. The historical development of science by social transmission in human culture has made it possible for us to loop back into the truth through chains of knowledge. But unlike the development of memory, this explosive transmission is no longer Darwinian. It follows Lamarckian rules because of the character of informational systems and the nature of meaning itself. The contents of informational systems are transferred by use; no genetic hereditary principle is needed. The transfer is to somatic systems, each one unique, and the results have been stunning — the transformation of the environment by the human mind in ways that are both valuable and horrendous.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, it is the construal of experience as the meaning of language that made it "possible within human cultural history to develop true information-processing systems".

The "explosive transmission" of science in human culture is indeed Darwinian, and not Lamarckian, because the material basis of (change in) meaning is the (change in) somatic selection of variant neuronal groups in populations in individuals — as described by Edelman's TNGS — in human populations, over generations.

The Measurements Of Observers Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 199):

Beginning with Planck's discovery of the quantum, and continuing through the early formulations of quantum theory by Bohr and Heisenberg and of the theory of relativity by Einstein, observers were no longer seen as fully detached from their measurements. In quantum measurements, the way in which observers choose to arrange their apparatus determines the outcome. In relativity theory, observers' measurements of time and length depend on their relative velocity and acceleration. Thus, the observers' conscious choices in the one case and their physical location in the other must explicitly be taken into account.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, measurements are construals of experience as material-relational domain of meaning by the mental-verbal domain of meaning (conscious observers).

The reason why measurements depend on the arrangement of the apparatus (Quantum Theory) and the relative velocity of the observer (Special Relativity) is because the potential meanings that can be instantiated as measurements vary with material-relational conditions of the phenomena (Quantum Theory) and conscious observer (Special Relativity).

The Relation Of Physics To Biology Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 198):

Physics and biology will "correspond" with each other in an intimate way, certainly in the next century and possibly even sooner than that. At the very least, they will have an exchange about how the human observer influences physical measurements and how the observers' perceptions relate to their physical descriptions. This is a key problem in quantum mechanics.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the relation of 'correspondence' between physics and biology can be understood in terms of symbolic abstraction (stratification), such that the meanings of biology are realised by the realisation of the meanings of chemistry in the meanings of physics. Or, from the reverse perspective, the meanings of physics realise the realisation of the meanings of biology in the meanings of chemistry.

The human observer 'influences' physical measurements by construing them of experience.  The observers' perceptions are construals of experience as the meaning of language, whereas their physical descriptions are reconstruals of such meaning as the meaning of the language of physics.

Science, Mathematics And Logic Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 198):

Higher-order consciousness leads to a rich cognitive, affective, and imaginative domain — feelings (qualia), thought, emotions, self-awareness, will, and imagination. It can construct artificial mental objects such as fantasies. In culture, it leads to studies of the stable relations among events (science) and among mental objects (mathematics), as well as to studies of the relations among sentences that refer to events and mental objects (logic).

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, it is language that provides self-awareness of higher-order consciousness and its mental processes, the most general being those of perception (of 'qualia'), cognition ('thought', 'imagination', 'fantasy'), desideration ('will') and emotion.

Through mental processes of cognition, the meanings of language that are construed of experience become reconstrued as the meanings of the specialised registers of science, mathematics and logic.

Cosmology Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 197):

Cosmology has formed part of the myth and the science of many civilisations. In it the mind has always played a central role, whether interior, exterior, or ulterior. It is natural for creatures like ourselves to wonder how everything came about, how we ourselves got here, and how we could come to be aware of the world in which we find ourselves. 

The religious cosmologies of the past have been replaced in some cultures by a scientific cosmology, one with remarkable ties to the farthest reaches of theoretical physics. But as grand and mysterious and beautiful as this scientific cosmology is, it has no inherent principle that would lead us to ourselves: observers who are conscious, who formulate physics and relate it to cosmology, and who have the urge to place ourselves within the scientific world view we have constructed. Even a "theory of everything," as some physicists call it, would be incomplete if it did not provide us with such a principle.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, cosmologies are reconstruals of the material-relational meanings of language, construed of experience, as the meanings of the language of mythology or science.  The reconstruals of meaning in the language of mythology deploy lexical metaphor, words as tokens of mythic values, whereas the reconstruals of meaning in the language of science deploy grammatical metaphor.

The rôle of the mind, of conscious observers, is to reconstrue the meaning of language as the meaning of the language of cosmology.

With regard to mythology, Joseph Campbell interprets its general function as putting humans in accord with their natural and social environments, and distinguishes four general functions: mystical, pedagogical, sociological and cosmological, with the sciences as the development of the last of these functions.

The Comprehensibility Of The Universe Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 197):

The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.

— Albert Einstein

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, comprehending the universe scientifically is comprehensible as the construing of experience as the meanings of the language of science.

Art Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 176):

What is perhaps most extraordinary about conscious human beings is their art — their ability to convey feelings and emotions symbolically and formally in external objects such as poems, paintings, or symphonies. The summaries of conscious states constrained by history, culture, specific training, and skill that are realised in works of art are not susceptible to the methods of scientific analysis. Again there is no mystification in this denial, for understanding and responding to these objects requires reference to ourselves in a social and symbolic mode. No external, objective analysis, even if possible, supplants the individual responses and intersubjective exchange that takes place within a given tradition and culture.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, human art, like higher-order consciousness, is made possible by language.  The construal of experience as linguistic meaning provides the raw material for, not only the expression of those meanings across various artistic forms, but also for the reconstrual of meaning as the meaning of theories of art, such as music theory, thereby further expanding the potential of artistic expression.

The reason why such matters are not susceptible to the methods of scientific analysis is that Galilean science is only concerned with the material-relational domain ('primary qualities'), not with the mental-verbal domain ('secondary qualities') that processes meaning.

Feelings And Emotions Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 176):

Feelings are a part of the conscious state and are the processes that we associate with the notions of qualia as they relate to the self. They are not emotions, however, for emotions have strong cognitive components that mix feelings with willing and with judgments in an extraordinarily complicated way. Emotions may be considered the most complex of mental states or processes insofar as they mix with all other processes (usually in a very specific way, depending on the emotion). They are not made simpler by the fact that they also have historical and social bases.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, emotions are construed in two complementary ways: as mental processes ('enjoy') and as attributed qualities of mental projection ('joyous').

Edelman's 'feelings associated with qualia' are mental processes of perception, whereas Edelman's 'emotions' are the mixture of the remaining three types of mental processes: emotion, cognition and desideration.