> But, as there _is_ by your account a way round this kind of
> self-contradiction, and if it
> _doesn't_ involve invoking a superordinate level of
> language/representation, I'd be very grateful if you could say a bit
> more. Could one use the self-referential property of the equations you
> mention to draw analogies to the strategic-operational distinction I
> mentioned in my e-mail?
>
I'm not clear if by superordinate levels of representation you also include
subordinate levels. I think for example that neuronal representations of language
could be viewed as subordinate (subconscious) in the same way that data in an
internet search engine is subordinate to the actual parent files. That aside,
would others agree with me that repertory grids are fractal non-linear self
representations of an infinite state space? We've all seen how fractals show
areas of infinite regression and I suggest that these are limiting signals which
one can use when predicting behavior of such a system. The trick is in being able
to identify that one is focussing on such a self representation and to track
component inversions.
An analogy can be drawn between past and present strategic implementations of
basic and applied research in science. In the past basic research was divorced
from the economy. Nowadays research is strategically applied to economic
justification and therefore by definition will produce fractal and chaotic
results leading to stagnation or infinite regression. A further example of how
navigation through chaos can allow for a pull back from an abyss is by examining
the way in which a world stock market crash was averted in October 1997.
Regards,
Jim Legg
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%