{Catastrophe Theory [continued (7)]}[26th September 1988]

[Redbook5:362-363][19880926:1545g]{Catastrophe Theory [continued (7)]}[26th September 1988]

19880926.1545

[continued]

Another difference* is that C[ircles] A[na[ysis] is primarily to do with the Individual – although the sequences of collectives often seem to fit; whereas I have the impression that C[atastophe] T[heory] and D[eterministic] C[haos] are least happy with the sequences of Individuals, preferring those of Collectives. The reason for this, I think, has to do** with the fact that C[atastophe] T[heory] and D[eterministic] C[haos] are primarily tools for the external observer, whereas C[ircles] A[na[ysis] is intended to help the Individual actually on the sequence: it is a guide to free choice, whereas the mathematical theories*** are still rooted in determinism.

*[between Catastrophe Theory & Circles Analysis – see last previous entry]

**(also perhaps being comparable to the inability of statistics to cope with Individuals)

***[ie Catastophe Theory and Deterministic Chaos]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger04for05052019]