It is shown that time may be appreciated in at least two senses: chronological and dynamical. Chronological time is the time of our naïve acquaintance as transient beings. At its most extensive scale, it corresponds to history encompassing both the abiotic and the biotic universe. Dynamical time, deriving from classical mechanics, is the time embraced by most of the laws of physics. It concerns itself only with present conditions since it is held that that the past may be reconstructed from (...) the present and the future predicted from the present, a position known as Laplacian determinism.Nonlinear dynamics has shown the fallacy of this supposition: The concrete values that may be assumed in the variables of the equations of motion constituting the laws of physics as a result of the spontaneous or intentional interaction of subject or measuring systems and of object or measured systems cannot be of infinite precision. Indeed, even if they could be, it is not at all clear that they would permit Laplacian determinism because of what is thought to be the ubiquity of K-flow dynamics in nature in which even infinite past information leading to the present cannot yield prediction of the future. In consequence, nonlinear dynamics, in rebellion against dynamical time, generates a primitive form of history distinguishing past, present, and future that may be termed nonlinear dynamical hysteresis.When nonlinear dynamics came to be complemented with semiotic modulation through the implement of symbol-mediated language as first instantiated through the communicating as opposed to the merely dynamically interacting molecular complexes of the cell, what can be termed semiotic hysteresis was born. The paper attempts to show that indefinitely evolving complexity, sustainability, justice, and meaning are indissolubly bound with chronological time in the sense of semiotic hysteresis : This semiotic hysteresis yields the indefinite evolutionary time of the living condition—including culture. (shrink)

It is argued that if mainstream neoclassical economics is to be compatible with the health of both the social and natural environments, then it must dispense with a purely micro-level, individual treatment of the world through market dynamics and instead embrace a complementary treatment involving macro-level, collective boundary constraints of an ethico-social-biophysical character selecting what market dynamics are permissible. In this way, economics is transformed from mere dynamics to semiotics, in accord with von Neumann’s seminal work disclosing that life is (...) to be identified with the selective action of boundary constraints of a linguistic or semiotic nature. (shrink)

It is argued that if mainstream neoclassical economics is to be compatible with the health of both the social and natural environments, then it must dispense with a purely micro-level, individual treatment of the world through market dynamics and instead embrace a complementary treatment involving macro-level, collective boundary constraints of an ethico-social-biophysical character selecting what market dynamics are permissible. In this way, economics is transformed from mere dynamics to semiotics, in accord with von Neumann’s seminal work disclosing that life is (...) to be identified with the selective action of boundary constraints of a linguistic or semiotic nature. (shrink)