[Fis] Anticipatory Systems--second thoughts

Wed Oct 24 07:43:20 CEST 2018

Caro Mark,
perchè  why narrative? Perchè narr-azione narra l'azione comunicativa. Ha
ragione Pedro. E' più di mezzo secolo che cerco di di-mostrare che
l'economia è una scienza o attività basata sulla triade significazione,
informazione, comunicazione. Si vedano ultimamente, in particolare, due
capitoli de "Il cammino degli uomini verso l'economia della salvezza o la
salvezza dell'economia" (Aracne editrice, Roma, 2018):

 * 9. Il linguaggio (la lingua e le parole) determina la relazionalità
umana, cioè i comportamenti comunicativi che si verificano in un sistema
sociale funzional−strutturale e dinamico, al quale partecipano persone che
tras−in−formano delle «unità di terzo ordine» o «accoppiamenti strutturali
onto−genetic(o)»−logici. L’insieme dei comportamenti comunicativi
costituisce la comunicazione. Tutto ciò che è vitale non può non essere
teleo−logicamente comunicativo o sottendere una visione onto−logica
implicante un’astrazione inferenziale concreta, effettiva e reale di cui
non si può fare a meno, come dimostra anche la mia *Nuova economia*. La
co−scienza etica nasce dall’inter−azione comunicativa tra gli uomini che si
accettano reciprocamente e solidalmente. Ecco come nasce l’amore. La
legittima presenza degli altri conferisce all’esistenza o esperienza una
dimensione etica (pp. 119-133).

*13. La funzione−processo della comunicazione dà forma e sostanza
all’esistenza e alla conoscenza e di−pende dalla fondamentale legge
dell’entropia/neg−entropia: duplice verità che rinnova la vita e influenza
la civiltà del futuro o il futuro della civiltà (pp. 181-204).

Grazie. Un saluto accogliente, augurale e cordiale.
Francesco.

Il giorno mer 24 ott 2018 alle ore 06:44 Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com>
ha scritto:

> Dear Pedro and list,
>
> I wonder if narrative is the right category to concentrate on. Clearly
> stories are important, but it does lead to the conclusion that
> "everything's a story" (or worse, MERELY a story), and that leads nowhere,
> in my opinion. Good stories are interesting because they have coherence (if
> they don't, are they stories at all?). I wonder if it's "coherence" which
> is at the root of the issue. The deeper question is whether the coherence
> lies in words of the story independently from the coherence of a
> conversation about it - Pedro's emphasis on dialogue is important. My guess
> is coherence arises from a totality which is essentially dialogical, as
> Pedro notes. But we need to get closer to "coherence", not narrative.
>
> When talking about dialogue, I'm puzzled by the emphasis on "two people":
> the "Dia" in dialogue means "through", so it's THROUGH "logos" (words,
> wisdom, etc): that can be many people, many brains. That's more than simply
> talking to one another. It's the full gamut of intersubjective engagement.
> Ultimately, that enlists an total ontology - biology, physics,
> consciousness, ontogeny, phylogeny, education, etc. (and yes, all of those
> things are indeed stories!)
>
> As Loet has noted, coherence is a problem, particularly in cybernetics. It
> cannot be accounted for in a bottom-up process; there has to be top-down
> coordination. It is the latter which gives coherence to everything: the
> great mystery of nature is, as John Torday remarked a while ago, that
> everything seems to fit together.
>
> My guess is that the coherence of stories, art, dialogue, etc is connected
> to the coherence of consciousness, which is probably connected to the
> coherence of biological processes, and why not physical processes too?
> After all, mathematics, (another product of consciousness, like a story)
> reveals fundamental patterns through fractals, and even our machine
> learning algorithms seem to obey some kind of fundamental self-symmetry in
> their operation, which whilst we are exploiting them, we understand very
> little about (this is fascinating:
> https://medium.com/intuitionmachine/the-holographic-principle-and-deep-learning-52c2d6da8d9
> )
>
> So my question is, why narrative? Coherence is the thing!
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Mark
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 19:38, Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>
> wrote:
>
>> Stan, List,
>>
>> I was thinking that those questions (below) or what, why, how, etc. are
>> not very useful either in order to ascertain "causality" around
>> communication phenomena. First, a communication is not "monologic" as the
>> Aristotelian scheme presupposes (at least implicitly) but "dialogic" as it
>> is a dialog between two parties who have different experiences,
>> backgrounds, preferences, valence, "logics", etc.  Thus the pieces of
>> communication between two or more parties cannot be explained
>> monologically, but establishing something else: a story, a narrative where
>> the relevant antecedent facts, the life stories of the protagonists, the
>> current or previous background, the exchanges themselves, etc. are
>> expressed with economy or "optimality" depending on the explanatory
>> purposes...  So very different narratives may be needed (including the
>> elaboration of "data") even about a single communication or interactive
>> exchange. In any event, the common factor is happenstances around life
>> cycles or life courses. Narratives are but complex pieces of information
>> --causative or descriptive-- that we naturally elaborate and interpret
>> around the social life around. And this may dovetail with the views of
>> Akerlof & Shiller on narratives in "phishing for phools" economics...
>> Does this make "informational" sense?
>> Best--Pedro
>>
>> El 21/10/2018 a las 20:58, Pedro C. Marijuan escribió:
>>
>>
>> To Stan: Thanks for incorporating the four Aristotelian causes below. But
>> do you think they are useful or well suited for communicational phenomena?
>> Rather they respond better to the single agent or designer arranging a
>> piece of the inanimate world to his/her plans. See the traditional metaphor
>> of the sculptor carving out the statue. But communication and narratives
>> could be different.  Seemingly they respond better to questions such as:
>> What? (Content) To whom? (interlocutor) Why? (reasons or purpose) How?
>> (style, moods, manners) How long? (duration of the engagement,
>> transitions). I think that when cells indulge in their molecular narratives
>> or when we do communicate with our stories the causal analysis becomes
>> different from the Aistotelian frame. It could be a good point to search
>> out.
>>
>> Best wishes to all
>> --Pedro
>>
>>  El 19/10/2018 a las 15:49, Stanley N Salthe escribió:
>>
>> On the topic of information as narration:
>>
>> Information as Narrative (would involve serial ‘statements’)
>>
>> Formal cause (of narrative) ...  the presence of available channels (in
>> nature and/or culture) for informative energy flows
>>
>> Material cause ...  available energy gradients for required actions
>> generating the narrative
>>
>> Efficient cause(s) ...  serial actions having sequential cumulative
>> effects on the result of information flow in such a channel
>>
>> Final cause ...  anticipated subsequents as effects of the narrative
>>
>>      (Anticipation requires system survival over a period of time, during
>> which impingements were survived, sometimes by way of internal modification
>> -- Rosen, 1985, Anticipatory Systems)
>>
>> STAN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>> -------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>> -------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Libre
>> de virus. www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>> <#m_2580504283716639646_m_890660000173903735_m_-7775806513548641261_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Mark William Johnson
> Institute of Learning and Teaching
> Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
> University of Liverpool
>
> Phone: 07786 064505
> Email: johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com
> Blog: http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20181024/4d449ab0/attachment.html>