[Fis] Reply to Pedro (Essential Core)

[Marcus Abundis]

Dear Pedro,
    Thank you detailing your thoughts! As you evoke “future exchanges” and
modifications, I am unsure of how to reply. Still, I offer a cursory
reaction:

> . . . putting together Shannon, Bateson, and Darwin, I <
> am not sure how that scheme would translate into the <
> "real" living stuff . . . Mostly thinking on the work <
> my team has done on bacterial communication for years, <
> I mentioned days ago three basic points about that: <
> universals, species-specificity, and essential cores. <
• First, I hope you may sense we are in “raging agreement” on your “three
basic points.” I think I named them in the introductory text (earlier
reply). There is little to be gained in debating things we agree. At worst,
this may require “word smithing” to join our views (I think).

> badly needed of Schrodinger's disclaimer. <
• Not exactly sure of your intended reference . . . (help?, important?)

• Re “Shannon, Bateson, and Darwin” [S, B, D] and
> How a plurality of those information universals could <
> be wrapped or articulated around an essential core? <
> That's the toughest point in my opinion . . . <
> *freewheeling speculation* [emphasis added: OUCH!] <
• First, excellent *toughest point*! Second, so you *at least* DO SEE
“Shannon, Bateson, and Darwin” as marking true “information universals”? If
YES, another point we agree on – if NOT, please explain how S, B, D ARE NOT
informational universals. I expect we both accept that, in itself, each
view is partial-but-universal in what it DOES PRESENT. If NOT, this is an
important difference to study.

• But on “freewheeling speculation” and “how that scheme would translate
into the ‘real’ living stuff” I point to paper #4 (Natural Multi-State
Computing) and Images D, E, and F. They show a graphical account of how the
model translates to real living stuff – and beyond. In pointing you to
paper #4, it DOES NOT detail a *cellular/bacterial* view [your expertise].
As such, I expect you to find paper #4 offers an unsatisfying narrative.
Here, my disclaimer/rejoinder is that no *full and complete* theory of
biology (FULLY explained life’s emergence) exists that *might* allow me to
frame an account to satisfy you. If you accuse me of “being glib” in
viewing Life’s rich complexity, I agree – AND I also say that’s not my
focus (just too damn “high-order”!!! for my aims).

• You may do better to see me as an “idiot savant” hoping to name
absolutely minimal (a priori) *differentiating differences* needed to
explain (necessary & sufficient) the richness we all experience. The video
shows that minimal order as delta O, delta S, delta Q, and delta X – your
universals, species specific, and core. I *think* this is the correct
minimal set, allowing us to “make things as simple as possible, but no
simpler” and from which rich complexity can later arise.

> two inseparable sides of the bio "coin" . . . and in <
> order to communicate the living needs its flexible <
> self-production processes... to fabricate the meaning!<
• Again, agreement. As I read through your remaining notes on
bacterial/cellular/system/genetic communication I agree with everything.
You do nice job of framing informational layers . . . a good job of
modeling the expertise I note at the end of my last post. Do you think we
somehow disagree on these points – sorry, I just don’t see it. What am I
missing? They seem like obvious necessary matters, no?

> Indeed they look very densely entangled within an <
> essential core. At stake is whether they are sufficient <
> and ontologically robust. Perhaps the most interesting <
> aspect is that herein *it becomes relatively easy* to <
> upend meaning, value . . . that accompanies information.<
• Yes, “it becomes relatively easy,” or so that is the goal of FIS, no? I
suggest that an *already implied* unifying (S, B, D) aspect in metadata –
fully deconstructed and grasped – allows us the needed solution and access.
That is the central point of the video.

Thank you for your energy and attention!

Marcus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20160707/b0a4c298/attachment.html>