Josué Antonio Nescolarde-Selva

A theorical point of view of reality, perception, and language

It is possible to view the relations between mathematics and natural language from different aspects. This relation between mathematics and language is not based on just one aspect. In this article, the authors address the role of the Subject facing Reality through language. Perception is defined and a mathematical theory of the perceptual field is proposed. The distinction between purely expressive language and purely informative language is considered false, because the subject is expressed in the communication of a message, and conversely, in purely expressive language, as in an exclamation, there is some information. To study the relation between language and reality, the function of ostensibility is defined and propositions are divided into ostensives and estimatives.

Myth, language, and complex ideologies

Ideologies use for their conservation and propagation persuasive methods of communication: rhetoric. Rhetoric is analyzed from the semiotic and logical-mathematical points of view. The following hypotheses are established: 1 language L is a self-explanatory system, mediated by a successive series of systems of cultural conventions, 2 connotative significances of an ideological advertising rhetoric must be known, and 3 the notion of ideological information is a neutral notion that does not imply the valuation of ideology or its conditions of veracity or falsification. Rhetorical figures like metonymy, metaphor, parable analogy, and allegory are defined as relations. Metaphor and parable are order relations. Operations of metonymic and metaphoric substitution are defined and several theorems derived from these operations have been deduced.

A logic-mathematical point of view of the truth: Reality, perception, and language

In this article, the authors propose a theory of the truth value of propositions from a logic-mathematical point of view. The work that the authors present is an attempt to address this question from an epistemological, linguistic, and logical-mathematical point of view. What is it to exist and how do we define existence? The main objective of this work is an approach to the first of these questions. We leave a more thorough treatment of the problem of existence for future works.

Complex impure systems: Sheaves, freeways, and chains

Fundamental to the approach of Complex Impure Systems is the definition of the concept of an s-impure set as a set of perceptual beliefs or denotative significances (relative beings) of material and/or energetic real objects (absolute beings). But any Subject not only the subject S perceives objects O as significances, and he perceives the existing relations between these significances or, alternatively, he infers them. The study of these relations, conceived not as a singular relation between singular objects, but as sheaves of relations in both directions and forming relational freeways, will be studied here. In this work, we approach the structure of the system, from a synchronous point of view, as a first approach to this class of systems. VC 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Complexity 000: 00–00, 2016

Causality in complex systems

Purpose The purpose of this paper is the study of the causal relationship. The concept called “naive” causality can be stated more generally as the belief (or knowledge) that results follow actions, and that these results are not random, but are consistently linked with causes. The authors have thus formed a very general and precarious concept of causality, but one that appropriately reflects the meaning of causality at the level of common sense. Design/methodology/approach Mathematical and logical development of the causality in complex systems. Findings There are three aspects of rationality that give the human mind a unique vision of reality: quantification: reduction of phenomena to quantitative terms; cause and effect: causal relationship, which allows predicting; and the necessary and valid use of (deterministic) mechanical models. This work is dedicated to the second aspect, that of causality, but at present leaves aside the discussion of possibility-necessity, proposing a modification to philosophical synthesis of causality specified by Bunge (1959), with contributions made by Patten et al. (1976) and LeShan and Margenau (1982). Originality/value Causality is an epistemological category, because it concerns the experience and knowledge of the human subject, without being necessarily a property of reality.

Data analysis using circular causality in networks

Complex systems in causal relationships are known to be circular rather than linear; this means that a particular result is not produced by a single cause, but rather that both positive and negative feedback processes are involved. However, although interpreting systemic interrelationships requires a language formed by circles, this has only been developed at the diagram level, and not from an axiomatic point of view. The first difficulty encountered when analysing any complex system is that usually the only data available relate to the various variables, so the first objective was to transform these data into cause-and-effect relationships. Once this initial step was taken, our discrete chaos theory could be applied by finding the causal circles that will form part of the system attractor and allow their behavior to be interpreted. As an application of the technique presented, we analyzed the system associated with the transcription factors of inflammatory diseases.

What are unintended and adverse consequences

The purpose of this study is to examine the unintended consequences of actions as one of the central and constituent elements of sociological theory and long debated in the history of sociology. This question has been treated under varying sociological terminologies, including, providence, social forces, social paradoxes, heterogeneity of ends, immanent causality and the principle of emergency.,This paper is concerned with “adverse effects”. The thematic contexts of “unintended consequences of social action” the authors wish to focus attention on are specific types of consequences which may merit the adjective “adverse”.,The analysis of the intentions of our actions and their unwanted or foreseen consequences allows us to understand how societies work. Many historical facts are probably “unintentional.” But, most continuous or changing life forms must be interpreted as a mixture of intentional (social reproduction) and unintentional consequences (social change).,This paper focuses on four points of view: the object of sociology, the problems of order and social change, the methodological status of the discipline and the nature of social explanation, and mathematical theory. Four classifications of unintended consequences are formulated from the works of Boudon, Baert and Ramos, as well as the authors.

Structure and Superstructures in Complex Social Systems

In classical sociology, there is a sharp separation between the superstructure reflecting cultural ideals and the concrete Structural Base (SB). The authors hypothesize a Doxical Superstructure (DS) in its own space at a higher level, containing concepts such as completeness, necessity and possibility associated with abstract concepts like beliefs, ethics, knowledge, relations and science. The DS or image (DS-image) is defined as the “explanation” (for the Subject-agent) of the Structural Base. A Mythical Superstructure (MS) is defined as a third superstructure. An analysis is carried out on the Structural Base. Concepts or denotative significances (d-significances) are defined for SB deontic relations. Alethic properties (existence, completeness, possibility and necessity) and deontic properties (permission, obligation and choice) of deontic relations are introduced, defined, and examined in relation to the Ideological Doxical Superstructure (IDS), including Meinong objects (thoughts, feelings and desires).