| Previous page of Issue |
The Nature of Form (Part 1)
| SERIES: The Nature of Form AUTHOR: Jim Schofield |
STRANDS: PHILOSOPHY / FORM |
ABSTRACT: This sequence of three papers considers the Nature of Form. First it concentrates on the quantitative aspect of Form, which is normally revealed by the pluralist Scientific Method and its corollary – Reductionism. The pragmatic patchwork of equations is criticised as not explaining things, and the quite distinct and philosophically different long established methods of Scientific Explanation are described , contrasted to, and related to the equations culminating Forms. In particular the Form usally called The Analogy – “from the known to the unknown” is explained as a more profound alternative to purely Quantitative Form. It is described as Qualitative Form and linked closely with Process, as distinct from Equations that are linked solely to Relation. |
SYNOPSIS: 1. Why Form is not causal, yet indisputably universal. Examples such as The Pile & Covergent Evolution are described 2. Recognition of their history and their development can lead to Real Explantion. The example of the developing embryo is described. 3. The virtues and vices of the Scientific Method – a Pluralist technique 4. The products of that method as “components”. 5. The necessary limits of all such derivations. |
| Left click to open in browser window, right click to download. |
| Previous paper in series |