On representation, and cladistics
Representation is the use of signs that stand in for and take the place of something else. It is through representation that people organize the world and reality. To represent is “to bring to mind by description”. For, example, a note is a representation of a tone, and a “clade” (as a figure) is a representation of a dichotomously branching process.
The relation between the representation and the represented must not, however, be confused, because the representation is a type (ie, an infinite class), whereas the represented is one or several real entities (ie, a finite class, or a category), and confusing them thus also confuses “infinite” with “finite”, which is paradoxically contradictory (as Russell’s also paradox shows), ie, an infinite recursion, between infinity and finity. Confusion of this relation is thus an infinite recursion.
It means that clades are consistently contradictory, ie, that dichotomously branching processes can’t be represented with dichotomously branching figures without contradiction. Claim of the opposite, called “cladistics”, is instead consistently contradictory.
It is simply contradictory to both confuse and deny the difference between representation and the represented - they are both the same and different at the same time. It is, however, not contradictory to distinguish them as representation and the represented of the same thing.
Or, in simpler terms, it is contradictory to confuse the representation with the represented because they are different.
Or, in even simpler terms, cladistics is self-contradictory (self-refuting) in claiming that the representation of a represented is the represented. If this would be true, then the represented would be a representation (unclear of what).
Another contribution to understanding of conceptualization http://menvall.wordpress.com/
2012-12-28 17:34:45
Source: http://menvall.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/on-representation-and-cladistics/
Source:
