[Fis] Further Discussion . . .
Pedro C. Marijuan
pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
Mon Feb 13 16:30:23 CET 2017
Dear Howard,
In any extent, your beautiful questions are beyond my reach. I think
that the physical characterization of life cannot even provide a whim on
your demands; but something of the informational might provide some
limited inroads: prokaryots could not achieve any significant progress
in morphological or differentiation capabilities within their
"colonies". Conversely, eukaryotes developed multicellularity due to
their far higher information content (genome), their far improved
signaling resources, their endless energy supply in support of the
general combinatoric problem-solving tools (mitochondria), and the
incorporation of a new locus (cytoskeleton) capable of feeling the force
field and reacting to it. A chain of amazing inventions is behind any of
the existing branches of complex life... can do they admit a general
explanation, not just based on natural selection, but on the improved
evolvability that has been obtained by being able to explore any
molecular-recognition contraption (within partially collapsed solution
state-spaces, a la Wagner?). Otherwise we are lead to admit a deep
enigma, still uncharted, or to look for external "intelligence"
solutions outside the limits of current scientific paradigms.
What is your own opinion??
Best wishes--Pedro
El 09/02/2017 a las 22:44, HowlBloom at aol.com escribió:
> fascinating thinking, pedro.
> it triggers this:
>
> The stages of development are far more than real-world problem
> solvers.They set artificial challenges, then achieve them.Making a
> caterpillar that works is anenormously complex challenge.Making a
> working butterfly is also immensely more complex than any simple
> challenge mounted by the environment.Changing from caterpillar to
> butterfly in one lifetime is unachievable beyond all belief.And these
> grotesquely artificial goals can’t be accounted for by a simple goal
> of survival.The goal, if anything, seems to be to accomplish the
> ornate, the unnecessary, the flamboyant, and the impossible.How does a
> drive toward impossible flamboyance get built intolife?How doesit get
> built into the cosmos?
>
> with warmth and oomph--howard
> ----------
> Howard Bloom
> Howardbloom.net
> author of : The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the
> Forces of History ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), Global Brain:
> The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century
> ("reassuring and sobering"-The New Yorker), The Genius of the Beast: A
> Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism ("Impressive, stimulating, and
> tremendously enjoyable."James Fallows, National Correspondent, The
> Atlantic), The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates ("Bloom's
> argument will rock your world." Barbara Ehrenreich), How I
> Accidentally Started the Sixties (“a monumental,epic, glorious
> literary achievement.” Timothy Leary), and The Muhammad Code: How a
> Desert Prophet Gave You ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram--or How
> Muhammad Invented Jihad (“a terrifying book…the best book I’ve read on
> Islam,” David Swindle, PJ Media).
> Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former Visiting
> Scholar—Graduate Psychology Department, NewYork University
> Founder: International PaleopsychologyProject; founder and chair,
> Space Development Steering Committee; Founding Board Member: Epic of
> Evolution Society; Founding Board Member, The Darwin Project; Board Of
> Governors, National Space Society; Founder: The Big Bang Tango Media
> Lab; member: New York Academy of Sciences, American Association for
> the Advancement of Science, American Psychological Society, Academy of
> Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, International
> Society for Human Ethology, Scientific Advisory Board Member, Lifeboat
> Foundation.
> In a message dated 2/9/2017 3:22:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es writes:
>
> Dear Marcus and Colleagues,
>
> Thanks for your interest. The Chengdu's Conference represented for
> me an occasion to return to my beginnings, in the 80's, when I
> prepared a PhD Thesis: "Natural Intelligence: On the evolution of
> biological information processing". It was mostly following a top
> down approach. But in some of the discussions outdoors of the
> conference (a suggestion for the next one in Shanghai: plenary
> discussion sessions should also be organized) I realized that
> biomolecular things have changed quite a lot. One could go
> nowadays the other way around: from the molecular-informational
> organization of cellular life, to intelligence of the cell's
> behavior withing the environment. The life cycle es essential. It
> provides the source of "meaning" (as I have often argued in
> discussions in the list) but it is also the reference for
> "intelligence". Communicating with the environment and
> self-producing by means of the environmental affordances have to
> be smoothly organized so that the stages of the life cycle may be
> advanced, and that the "problems" arising from the internal or the
> external may be adequately solved. It means signalling and
> self-modifying in front of the open-ended environmental problems,
> sensing and acting coherently... It strangely connects with the
> notion of human "story" and the communication cycle in the
> humanities. Relating intelligence to goal accomplishment or to an
> architecture of goals as usually done in computational realms
> implies that the real life course (or the surrogate) is reduced to
> a very narrow segment. True intelligence evaporates.
> These were some of my brute reflections that I have to keep musing
> around (I saw interesting repercussions for cellular signaling
> "narratives" too). Maybe this is also a good opportunity for other
> parties of that conference to expostulate their own impressions
> --very exciting presentations both from Chinese and Western
> colleagues there.
>
> Thanks again,
> --Pedro
>
> El 08/02/2017 a las 14:14, Marcus Abundis escribió:
>> > In next weeks some further discussion might be started, but at
>> the time being, the slot is empty (any ideas?)<
>>
>> Hi Pedro,
>>
>> For my part I would appreciate a chance to hear more about the
>> thoughts you have been developing (even if they are very rough)
>> as related to the talk you gave in China last summer.
>>
>> Alternatively, further thoughts on Gordana's talk would be nice
>> to hear.
>>
>> For both of these talks, you both shared your presentation stack
>> . . . but there was so much information in both of those talks,
>> it would be nice to have some of "unpacked."
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> Pedro C. Marijuán
> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
--
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20170213/cbca59cd/attachment.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list