[Fis] Book Presentation

[Karl Javorszky]

PS.: The compiler ate the following paragraph:

......   numbers.

You appear to start off with the belief that the idea of contrast cannot be
discussed in rational terms anyway, because the natural numbers allow for
no contrasts, because there everything is of unitary nature and congruent.
This is an outdated position.......

Sorry
Karl

Am Di., 5. Apr. 2022 um 14:26 Uhr schrieb Karl Javorszky <
karl.javorszky en gmail.com>:

> Dear Mariusz,
>
> Thank you for the insights contained in your work dealing with contrasts.
> Your research appears to me to work in the right direction, by making
> understandable that what had appeared unrelated before.
>
> Please allow me to insert comments after some of your sentences.
>
> Our dispersed knowledge needs an underlying structure that allows it to be
> organised into a coherent and complex system.
>
> Yes. Is not by any chance the system of natural numbers such a coherent
> and complex system, into which an underlying structure can be
> integrated/organised? If so, then what you wish is to be able to use the
> system of natural numbers in a fashion, that its -the numbering system’s –
> coherent and complex relations can be recognised in the dispersed knowledge?
>
> I believe “Theory and Practice of Contrast” provides such a structure by
> bringing the considerations to the most basic, general and abstract level.
> At this level it is possible to define *contrast as a tension between
> common and differentiating features of objects. It grows in intensity as
> the number/strength of differentiating and common features of contrasting
> structures/objects increases*. Contrast understood in this way applies to
> any objects of reality (mental and physical) and is also an impact (causal
> force) in the most general sense. Contrast as a common principle organises
> (binds) our knowledge into a coherent system. This is illustrated by a
> diagram of the connections between the key concepts:
>
> Trying to be the most basic, general and abstract is trying to be
> understandable interpersonally. Contrast is a relation between similar and
> diverse, observed on *two *entities (that are in contrast). Contrast as
> such is a property of two assemblies that are different and similar a. both
> within themselves and b. in comparison to each other. Contrast has
> different measures, here called intensity. Contrast exists as a mental
> creation and independently as a property of Nature about which we can speak
> understandably, interpersonally (it has an objective existence). Contrast
> as a common principle organises (binds) our knowledge into a coherent system
> [image: grafik.png]
>
> .
>
> The relations depicted in this diagram go far beyond anything we can today
> reasonably approach with the hope of being able to learn the rational
> procedure behind it. If one can elaborate on the interdependence between
> art, its value and the abstract beauty in it, such a person is deeply at
> home in the history of art and social histories of peoples. Basically,
> there is nothing wrong with the ambitious approach depicted in the Schema.
> Indeed, it is the contrast between perceived worth and intrinsic value that
> fuels the controversy. Contrast is at work everywhere in the Schema, no
> question about that.
>
> A much less ambitious approach – but probably more communicable
> interpersonally – would place contrast in a perspective with less width,
>
> similar
>
> aspect
>
> difference
>
> *contrast*
>
> inner-outer
>
> foreground
>
> actual
>
> Please allow me the suggestion that you br
>
> Please allow me the suggestion that you bring your delineated concepts in
> parallel, in congruence with rational thinking, as represented by
> operations conducted on natural numbers.
> This is an outdated position. It has been shown, *(oeis.org/A242615
> <http://oeis.org/A242615>),* that there exists a relative inexactitude
> among measurements conducted on natural numbers that is immanent to the
> numbering system. We can assume that we mean the same as we say ‘relation’.
> Then, only the term ‘object’ remains to be defined, which is for me a
> collection of relations beyond a threshold of certainty.
>
> We see that there exists a three-way interdependence between *similarity
> – diversity – distinguishability. *To the distinguishability dimension of
> a collection (on which we have marks eg of : *{as good as empty,
> probability, field, force, distance, object, mass, kinetic mass, energy} *we
> have the dimension *similarity *which measures what part of the
> collection does not change and which elements are contemporaneously *now*,
> and the dimension *diversity *which measures how many successors are
> different to their predecessors, and by how much and how contrasted that
> what is presently not the case (not *now*) to that what will be the case.
>
> The fundamental algorithm has been found. Some important relations have
> become also visible in the mist caused by everything being concurrently
> similar and diverse, in dependence of the comparison being done with or
> against whom or what or where or when.
>
> In this sense, *contrast *is indeed the central key concept, the solid
> rock upon which a whole system of beliefs can be based. Whether the time
> has come, that
>
> your sentence:
>
> *            Contrast is the central and key concept in information theory*
>
> and my sentence
>
> *            Contrast can be numerically established as a property of an
> assembly that has members that are similar and diverse among each other and
> undergo periodic changes. *
>
> make a click in further persons’ brains, remains to be seen.
>
>
>
> You can be sure you will not lose a bet, if you bet that wishing away the
> contrast *(3+4)=7 *is no serious way of doing business. We may say and
> decree that that what has contrasted *(3,4) *against each other has
> disappeared and will never plot any revenge for having been defined out of
> existence, but those who know about the non-repressibility of things that
> are actually there (slaves, women, children, etc.), will be relaxed and
> know that the day of reckoning with those abandoned step-relations, the
> cuts (here: contrasts), which we avoid talking about, shall inevitably come.
>
> Similarly, this person is strong in his faith, that sorting, ordering and
> reordering simple logical symbols will inevitably turn up typical patterns,
> and that such patterns will be of interest for Physics and Chemistry.
>
>
>
> Mariusz, what you write is first class in its content. In its
> argumentative value, it would gain if you could support your arguments by
> simple calculations and referring to numeric facts. There are two messages
> here:
>
> a. It is possible to refer to contrast-type relations exactly, because the
> two ordering principles (similarity – diversity) have been found to have
> left valleys and hills on *N. *It is possible to refer to the natural
> extent of contrast, like to the background radiation of the Universe.
>
> b. it is not at all sure that your audience is ready for convincing
> arguments. They live in one, unified, indivisible world where the existence
> of a duality – and the varied and varying extent of contrasts among its
> parts – is of no immediate sensual experience. Anyway, one can try.
>
>
>
> Thank you again for presenting contrast to be debatably THE central
> concept of information theory, which deals with things being otherwise than
> expected. The extent of being otherwise is perceived under some
> circumstances as causing the sensual or mental experience of contrast.
>
>
>
> Karl
>
>
>
> Am Di., 5. Apr. 2022 um 14:02 Uhr schrieb Pedro C. Marijuán <
> pedroc.marijuan en gmail.com>:
>
>> Dear Mariusz,
>>
>> Many thanks for your summary of the book. Given that many chapter
>> summaries are accessible via web, I would suggest fis parties to search for
>> them in order to have a better understanding of the views sketched in the
>> present summary. Overall, I think it is a brave exploration of one of the
>> fundamental conceptual challenges of our time --information, information
>> science, information studies, etc.-- which has been made starting form the
>> arts, the visual arts concretely.
>>
>> Taking contrast as the fundamental term does not look a bad idea, for it
>> can be supported by different art related neuroscience views (e.g.,
>> Ramachandran, Leyton), art theorists, and philosophers.
>> The extent to which it really matches with cognitive science and
>> artificial intelligence goes beyond my own; maybe it matches well with the
>> approach that Yixin (e.g., "ontological versus epistemological information)
>> has defended in our discussions. The contrast term is somehow germane of
>> the use I make of "distinctions" (information as distinction on an adjacent
>> difference) with the difference that I continue towards the biological
>> world (via molecular recognition), or better that I arrive to that idea
>> mostly from the familiarity with the molecular biological world.
>>
>> In the present case, the approach to contrast stems from the visual arts,
>> and this implies pros and cons. The approach becomes anthropocentric, being
>> difficult (at least apparently) to transcend simpler nervous systems,
>> living cells, etc. So reception or processing information would appear as a
>> capability bound to humans, to human mind, and vicariously expanded toward
>> different disciplines. Then, looking closely to the  term contrast, it
>> appears itself a great discussion arena. Doesn't it need immediately the
>> term "context"?   If it essentially is "a tension between common and
>> differentiating features of objects", even the simplest ordinary object
>> such a chair, a stone, or a simplest living creature, may generate endless
>> contrasts that we need to subsume into specialized areas of "domesticated"
>> contrasts (be they scientific, technical, literary, visual, etc.).
>>
>> I am not discussing again the term, but looking for more clarity on some
>> of  its accompanying terms... these are just very preliminary reactions.
>>
>> In any case, the book is really a great piece of work.
>>
>> Best--Pedro
>>
>>
>> --El 02/04/2022 a las 16:13, Mariusz Stanowski escribió:
>>
>> *Book Presentation*
>>
>> *“Theory and Practice of Contrast: Integrating Science, Art and
>> Philosophy.”*
>>
>> *Mariusz Stanowski*
>>
>> *Published June 10, 2021 by CRC Press (hardcover and eBook).*
>>
>> Dear FIS list members,
>>
>> Many thanks for the opportunity to present my recent book in this list.
>>
>>
>>
>> Our dispersed knowledge needs an underlying structure that allows it to
>> be organised into a coherent and complex system.
>>
>> I believe “Theory and Practice of Contrast” provides such a structure by
>> bringing the considerations to the most basic, general and abstract level.
>> At this level it is possible to define *contrast as a tension between
>> common and differentiating features of objects. It grows in intensity as
>> the number/strength of differentiating and common features of contrasting
>> structures/objects increases*. Contrast understood in this way applies
>> to any objects of reality (mental and physical) and is also an impact
>> (causal force) in the most general sense. Contrast as a common principle
>> organises (binds) our knowledge into a coherent system. This is illustrated
>> by a diagram of the connections between the key concepts:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Below are brief descriptions of these connections.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Contrast—Development *When observing a contrast, we also observe the
>> connection between contrasting objects/structures (resulting from their
>> common features) and the emergence of a new, more complex structure
>> possessing the common and differentiating features of connected structures.
>> In the general sense, the emergence of a new structure is tantamount to
>> development. Therefore, it may be stated that contrast is a perception of
>> structures/objects connections, or experience of development. The
>> association of contrast with development brings a new quality to the
>> understanding of many other fundamental concepts, such as beauty, value,
>> creativity, emergence. (Similarly, *contrast as development *is
>> understood in Whitehead’s philosophy).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Contrast—Complexity *In accordance with the proposed definition, when
>> we consider the contrast between two or more objects/structures, it grows
>> in intensity as the number/strength of differentiating and common features
>> of contrasting structures/objects increases. Such an understanding of
>> contrast remain an intuitive criterion of complexity that can be formulated
>> as follows: *a system becomes more complex the greater is the number of
>> distinguishable elements and the greater the number of connections among
>> them**. *If in definition of contrast we substitute “differentiating
>> features” for “distinguishable elements” and “common features” for
>> “connections”, we will be able to conclude that *contrast is the
>> perception and measure of complexity.*
>>
>> Note: Two types of contrasts can be distinguished: the sensual (physical)
>> contrast, which is determined only by the force of features of contrasting
>> objects and the mental (abstract) contrast which depends primarily on the
>> number of these features. (This contrast can be equated with complexity).
>> (The equation of contrast with complexity is an important finding for the
>> investigations in: cognitive sciences, psychology, ontology, epistemology,
>> aesthetics, axiology, biology, information theory, complexity theory and
>> indirectly in physics).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Complexity—Information Compression *Intuition says that the more
>> complex object with the same number of components (e.g. words) has more
>> features/information (i.e. more common and differentiating features), which
>> proves its better organization (assuming that all components have the same
>> or similar complexity). We can also say that such an object has a higher
>> degree of complexity. The degree of complexity is in other words the
>> brevity of the form or the compression of information. Complexity
>> understood intuitively (as above) depends, however, not only on the
>> complexity degree (that could be defined as the ratio of the number of
>> features to the number of components) but also on the (total) number of
>> features, because it is more difficult to organize a larger number of
>> elements/features. In addition, the more features (with the same degree of
>> complexity), the greater the contrast. Therefore, in the proposed *Abstract
>> Definition of Complexity *(2011), we multiply the degree of complexity
>> by the number of features. This definition defines the complexity (C) of
>> the binary structure (general model of all structures/objects) as the
>> quotient of the square of features (regularities/substructures) number (N)
>> to the number of components or the number of zeros and ones (n). It is
>> expressed in a simple formula: C = N²/n and should be considered the most
>> general definition of complexity, among the existing ones, which also
>> fulfils the intuitive criterion. (This relation explains what compression
>> of information in general is and what role it plays as a complexity factor.
>> This allows to generalize the notion of information compression and use it
>> not only in computer science, but also in other fields of knowledge, such
>> as aesthetics, axiology, cognitive science, biology, chemistry, physics).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Information compression—Development *Our mind perceiving objects
>> (receiving information) more compressed, saves energy.
>> Compression/organization of information reduce energy of perception while
>> maintaining the same amount of information (in case of lossless
>> compression). Thanks to this, perception becomes easier (more economical)
>> and more enjoyable; for example, it can be compared to faster and easier
>> learning, acquiring knowledge (information), which also contributes to our
>> development. Compression of information as a degree of complexity also
>> affects its size. Complexity, in turn, is a measure of contrast (and vice
>> versa). Contrast, however, is identified with development. Hence,
>> complexity is also development. This sequence of associations is the second
>> way connecting the compression of information with development. Similarly,
>> one can trace all other possibilities of connections in the diagram. (The
>> association of information compression with development brings a new,
>> explanatory knowledge to many fields including cognitive science,
>> aesthetics, axiology, information theory).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Development—Value *Development is the essence of value, because all
>> values (ethical, material, intellectual, etc.) contribute to our
>> development which is their common feature. It follows that value is also a
>> contrast, complexity and compression of information because they are
>> synonymous with development. (The relation explains and defines the notion
>> of value fundamental to axiology).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Value—Abstract Value *About all kinds of values (with the exception of
>> aesthetic values) we can say, what they are useful for. Only aesthetic
>> values can be said to serve the development or be the essence of values,
>> values in general or abstract values. This is a property of abstract
>> concepts to express the general idea of something (e.g. the concept of a
>> chair includes all kinds of chairs and not a specific one). It follows that *what
>> is specific to aesthetic value is that it is an abstract value*
>> (although it is difficult to imagine). (This is a new understanding of
>> aesthetic value, crucial for aesthetics and axiology).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Contrast—Being *Contrast or interaction is a concept prior to the
>> concept of being because without interaction there is no existence. It
>> follows that the basic component of being must be two
>> objects/elements/components (creating a contrast) having common and
>> differentiating features. (Understanding of being as a contrast is
>> fundamental to ontology and metaphysics and worth considering in physics).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Contrast—Cognition *The object of cognition and the subject (mind)
>> participate in the cognitive process. The object and the subject have
>> common and differentiating features, thus they create a contrast. Cognition
>> consists in attaching (through common features) differentiating features of
>> the object by the subject. In this way, through the contrast, the subject
>> develops. It can therefore be said that cognition is a contrast of the
>> object with the subject. (This is a new definition of cognition important
>> for epistemology and cognitive science).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Cognition—Subjectivity *The above understanding of cognition agrees all
>> disputable issues (present, among others, in psychology, cognitive science
>> and aesthetics) regarding the objectivity and subjectivity of assessments
>> (e.g. whether the source of beauty is the observer's mind, whether it is a
>> specific quality from the observer independent), because it shows that they
>> depend on both the subject and the object, i.e. depend on their
>> relationship—contrast.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Compression of information—Beauty *Beautiful are objects with high
>> information compression (a large degree of complexity/organization). Thanks
>> to the compression of information, perceiving beauty, we save energy, the
>> perception becomes more economical and pleasant which favours our
>> development and is therefore a value for us. The example is golden
>> division. Counting features (information) in all possible types of
>> divisions (asymmetrical, symmetrical and golden) showed that the golden
>> division contains the most features/information (an additional feature is
>> well known golden proportion) and therefore creates the greatest contrast,
>> complexity and aesthetic value.  (This explains the previously unknown
>> reasons for aesthetic preferences, key to aesthetics, art theory,
>> psychology, cognitive science and neuroaesthetics).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Development—Beauty *Beauty contributes to development thanks to the
>> economy of perception. Perception of beauty is accompanied by a sense of
>> development or ease and pleasure of perception. (This explains the causes
>> of aesthetic preferences).
>>
>>
>>
>> *Abstract Value—Beauty, Art *Only beauty and art have no specific value
>> but they express/have value in general (an abstract value). The objects
>> that make up a work of art are not important, but their
>> contrast-interaction, which results from the complexity of the artwork. (If
>> we see a single object in the gallery, then the art is its contrast with
>> the context - as in the case of Duchamp's "Urinal" or Malevich's "Black
>> Square"). One can say that beauty and art are distinguished (defined) by
>> two elements: abstract value and a large contrast. (This is a new and
>> only definition of beauty/art that indicates the distinctive common
>> features of all aesthetic/artistic objects, it is crucial for the theory of
>> art, aesthetics, axiology and epistemology).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing listFis en listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <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_7902777830287494542_m_-6107821762731779669_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis en listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada
>> por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
>> siguiente enlace:
>> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220405/73193d4b/attachment-0001.html>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oJExKqn4TA84gT0C.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18748 bytes
Desc: no disponible
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220405/73193d4b/attachment-0002.png>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: grafik.png
Type: image/png
Size: 47967 bytes
Desc: no disponible
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220405/73193d4b/attachment-0003.png>