Forging New Frontiers: Fuzzy Pioneers II pp 363-376
Fuzzy Logic in a Postmodern Era
Abstract An event is a spatio-temporally localizable occurrence. Each event in our universe can be defined within a two-dimensional space in which one dimension is causality and the other is serendipity. Unfortunately, the majority of scientists in the Modern Era in their fascination with rules of causality and wanting to believe in a complete deterministic expression of the universe have banished all notions of serendipity to the realm of fiction, religion and/or, the occult. But the hegemony of Newtonian causality finally crumbled under the gravity of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle which demonstrated that an external observer can never acquire enough information to fully express the state of a system. This was a quantum physical expression of what was later eloquently put by Heidegger in his philosophical definition of Ereignis, to designate an unpredictable and often uncontrollable disruption of the spatio-temporal causal continuity. In the Postmodern Era, when events such as 9/11 occur beyond any assessable realm of causal relationships, we can no longer afford to discard the serendipity component of events if we wish to understand with clarity.Instead we must devise rules of conformity between the causal and non-causal fields of reality. Fuzzy Logic provides such a vigorous system of thinking that can lead us to this accord. This paper uses the tools of Fuzzy Logic to find pathways for events taking place within a causal-serendipity space. As a first approach, an event is defined on a hyperbolic path in which the degree of serendipity multiplied by the degree of causality is constant. This allows for the diminution of serendipity as scientific knowledge about a subject increases and the enhancement of serendipity to become dominant when data are scarce or measurements uncertain. The technique is applied to several different types of causality – direct, chain-like, parallel, and accumulation.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- J. Derrida, 1967a. Structure, Sign and Play in Discourse of the Human Sciences, in Writing and Difference, University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar
- J. Derrida, 1967b. Difference, in Speech and Phenomena, Northwest University Press, Illinois.Google Scholar
- M. Heidegger, 1996. The Principle of Reason. Translated by Reginal dLily, Indiana University Press, p. 148.Google Scholar
- M. Heidegger, 1999. Contributions to Philosophy–Vom Ereignis, Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- D. Hume, 1987. Treatise of Human Nature, Book One, edited by D.G.C. MacNabb, Fontana/Collins, 7th Ed., p. 283.Google Scholar
- I. Kant, 1997. Critique of Pure Reason, Cambridge Press, p.785.Google Scholar
- S. Kierkegaard, 1985. Philosophical Fragments, edited and translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong with Introduction and Notes, Princeton University Press, p. 371.Google Scholar
- S. Kierkegaard, 1992. Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments, edited and translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong with Introduction and Notes, Princeton University Press, p. 371.Google Scholar
- J. Lacan, 1997. The Function of Language in Psychoanalysis, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London.Google Scholar
- J.F. Lyotard, 1985. The Post-Modern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, University of Minnesota Press, p. 110.Google Scholar
- F. Nietzsche, 1968. Twilight of the Idols, The Portable Nietzsche, edited and translated by Walter Kaufmann, Penguin Books Ltd., London, p. 692.Google Scholar
- L. Zadeh, 2003. Causality is indefinable–toward a theory of hierarchical definability. in Intelligence in a Materials World: selected papers from IPMM-2001, CRC Press, NY, 237.Google Scholar