[Fis] Book Presentation. Potentiality as well as Actuality
Mariusz Stanowski
stanowskimariusz at wp.pl
Mon Apr 11 12:31:11 CEST 2022
We are all right you are talking about the practical possibility of
simulation and I am talking about the theoretical.
Best regards
Mariusz
W dniu 2022-04-11 o 11:30, Daniel Boyd pisze:
>
> Dear Joe, dear Mariusz
>
> Thankyou for both your responses. If I may pursue the topic of
> continuous-discontinuous contrasts further: is the solution to
> Joseph’s issue with non-computable processes perhaps to be found in
> acknowledging the distinction between the reality and its
> representation/simulation?
>
> Take a landscape. In reality this contains an almost infinite amount
> of continuous and discontinuous detail from the subatomic particle to
> the geological mountain. A representation or simulation (artistic or
> scientific) of this reality cannot and need not accurately reproduce
> this detail to fulfil its purpose: distillation, approximation, even
> distortion may justifiably be involved. An artistic rendition, unless
> intended as photo-realistic, will be intentionally inaccurate. Digital
> representations are, for the sake of efficiency, designed to compress
> information to the minimum required to provide the illusion of
> accuracy based on the sensitivity of our senses. This accounts for the
> 16,7 million colour standard for images: a lot of colours, but only a
> coarse approximation to the real colours of the rainbow. Our own
> senses apply similar necessary estimations: the cells of the retina
> determine the maximal pixel definition of the image recreated in the
> brain: the continuous is made discontinuous.
>
> Such representational approximations do not, however, imply
> discontinuity in the object observed. We see this in the inability of
> algorithmic simulations to accurately predict the future of non-linear
> systems in which arbitrarily small differences in initial conditions
> may have large effects as the system evolves.
>
> Perhaps this distinction between reality and representation lies, in
> your diagram, between the being-contrast-complexity column and the
> neighbouring elements? Or, possibly, you intend the
> being-contrast-complexity elements not to refer to the objects of
> reality themselves, but the perception/representation of them?
>
> Regards, Daniel
>
> *From: *joe.brenner at bluewin.ch <mailto:joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>
> *Sent: *Sunday, 10 April 2022 11:53
> *To: *Mariusz <mailto:stanowskimariusz at wp.pl>; daniel.boyd at live.nl
> <mailto:daniel.boyd at live.nl>; "fis" <mailto:fis at listas.unizar.es>
> *Cc: *fis at listas.unizar.es <mailto:fis at listas.unizar.es>;
> daniel.boyd at live.nl <mailto:daniel.boyd at live.nl>
> *Subject: *Re: Re: [Fis] Book Presentation. Potentiality as well as
> Actuality
>
> Dear Mariusz, Dear Daniel,
>
> Please allow me to enter the discussion at this point. I will go back
> to the beginning as necessary later. I am in general agreement with
> Mariusz' approach, but I believe it could be strengthened by looking
> at the potential as well as the actual aspects of the phenomena in
> question. Thus when Mariusz writes interaction, is a prior concept to
> the concept of being, because without interaction there is no being.
> It follows that the basic ingredient of being must be two
> objects/elements/components (forming a contrast) that have common and
> differentiating features."). , I would add the dimension of becoming,
> which is a more dynamic relation. We can more easily talk about
> processes and change instead of component objects
>
> A similar comment could be made about the discrete-continuous
> distinction. This is at the same time also an appearance-reality
> duality which is not static, but embodies the change from actual to
> potential and vice versa just mentioned.
>
> I do not, however, agree with the following statement: Besides it is
> already known that using binary structures it is possible to simulate
> any processes and objects of reality) There are many non-computable
> process aspects of reality that cannot be captured and simulated by an
> algorithm without loss of information and meaning. In the "graph" of
> the movement of a process from actuality to potentiality, the limiting
> points of 0 and 1 are not included - it is non-Kolmogorovian.
>
> I would say regarding beauty that it is a property emerging from the
> various contrast or antagonisms in the mind/body of the artist. The
> logic of such processes as I have remarked is a logic of energy, and
> this seems to fit here.
>
> Thank you and best wishes,
>
> Joseph
>
> ----Message d'origine----
> De : stanowskimariusz at wp.pl
> Date : 10/04/2022 - 08:35 (CEST)
> À : daniel.boyd at live.nl, fis at listas.unizar.es
> Objet : Re: [Fis] Book Presentation
>
> Dear Daniel,
>
> Thank you for your questions. Below are the highlighted answers
> (of course they are more complete in the book).
>
> Best regards
>
> Mariusz
>
> W dniu 2022-04-09 o 17:37, Daniel Boyd pisze:
>
> Dear Mariusz
>
> While (or perhaps because!) your work is a fair distance from
> my own field of expertise, I found your conceptual framework
> intriguing. Herewith some of the thoughts it elicited. While
> they may be unexpected because they come from a different
> angle, hopefully a cross-disciplinary interaction will be
> fruitful.
>
> The Second Law of Thermodynamics dictates the ultimate heat
> death of the universe (a state in which all 'contrasts' are
> erased). (The heat death of the universe is just a popular
> view and not a scientific truth)Its current state, fortunately
> for us, is teeming with differences (between entities,
> properties and interactions) which underlie all that is of
> importance to us. To take such contrasts as a unifying
> principle would therefore seem to be undeniable, if extremely
> ambitious! After all, the sheer diversity of contrasts takes
> us from the different spins of subatomic particles underlying
> the various elements to the masses of the celestial bodies
> determining their orbits around the sun; from the colours in a
> painting to the sounds of a symphony. Systemically, different
> patterns of contrasts underlie the distinctions between linear
> and complex systems. Contrasts also form the basis for the
> working of our sense organs, the perceptions derived from
> them, and the inner world of conscious experience. In each of
> these contexts very different classes of contrasts lead to
> different mechanisms and laws, leading me to wonder just what
> the 'underlying structure' is (beyond the observation that,
> ultimately, some type of contrast is always involved and that
> we tend to deal with such diverse contrasts in a similar way).
> Maybe your book provides an answer to this question that I am
> unable to find in this brief abstract: could you perhaps say
> something about this? (The answer to this question is
> contained in the contrast-being relation: "Contrast-Being
> Contrast, or interaction, is a prior concept to the concept of
> being, because without interaction there is no being. It
> follows that the basic ingredient of being must be two
> objects/elements/components (forming a contrast) that have
> common and differentiating features.").
>
> Moving on to more specific topics, I see that you equate the
> complexity of a system to a relationship between binary values
> (C = N²/n). While such as approach may work for discontinuous
> contrasts (e.g. presence/absence, information in digital
> systems) many naturally occurring differences are continuous
> (e.g. the electromagnetic frequencies underlying the colours
> of the rainbow). In neuroscience, while the firing of a neuron
> may be a binary event, the charge underlying this event is a
> dynamic continuous variable. My question: how does the concept
> of abstract complexity deal with continuous variables
> ("contrasts")?(What seems to us to be continuous in reality
> may be discrete, e.g. a picture or a sound on a computer is
> continuous and in reality it is a binary structure of electric
> impulses; a continuous color is a vibration of an
> electromagnetic wave. Besides it is already known that using
> binary structures it is possible to simulate any processes and
> objects of reality).
>
> I was also intrigued by your statement that "Beautiful are
> objects with high information compression" based on the
> reasoning "perceiving beauty, we save energy, the perception
> becomes more economical and pleasant". Intuitively, it seems
> odd to me to equate beauty to the lack of perceptive effort
> required.(This is not about "no effort" but about "saving
> effort". If we have a beautiful and an ugly object with the
> same information content, the perception of the beautiful
> object will require less energy. The measure of beauty is not
> the amount of effort/energy, but the amount of energy saved,
> which in the case of the Sagrada Familia will be greater).
> This would mean that the Pentagon (high
> regularity/compressibility) is more beautiful than the Sagrada
> Familia (low regularity/compressibility); and a
> single-instrument midi rendition of Bach is more beautiful
> than a symphonic performance. It seems to me that beauty often
> stimulates (gives energy) rather than just costing minimal
> energy. Much research has been done on the universal and
> culture-dependent perception of beauty: does this support your
> statement? see e.g.
> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01229.x
> <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01229.x> which
> describes factors other than simplicity as necessary
> characteristics. (This article is based on faulty assumptions
> e.g. misunderstanding Kolmogorov's definition of complexity,
> which is not applicable here).
>
>
>
> <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01229.x>
>
>
>
> Musings About Beauty - Kintsch - 2012 - Cognitive Science -
> Wiley Online Library
> <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01229.x>
>
> Aesthetics has been a human concern throughout history.
> Cognitive science is a relatively new development and its
> implications for a theory of aesthetics have been largely
> unexplored.
>
> onlinelibrary.wiley.com
>
> By defining contrast as a distinction between entities or
> properties, it seems to come close as a definition to the type
> of information underlying physical entropy. That being the
> case, your approach would seem to resemble those who would
> give such information a comparable fundamental significance
> (e.g. Wheeler's "it from bit"). Could you say something about
> how you see the relationship between 'contrast' and
> 'information? Are they effectively synonyms?Contrast and
> information are different concepts. Information is a feature
> or form of energy. Contrast is the tension/force/energy
> created by the interaction of common features (attraction) and
> different features (repulsion) of contrasting objects).
>
> Thankyou, in any case, for your contribution which certainly
> demonstrates the relationship between Value and Development 😉
>
> Regards, Daniel Boyd
>
> *Van: *Mariusz Stanowski
> *Verzonden: *zaterdag 2 april 2022 19:23
> *Aan: *fis at listas.unizar.es
> *Onderwerp: *[Fis] Book Presentation
>
> *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).
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220411/db307a30/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oJExKqn4TA84gT0C.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18748 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220411/db307a30/attachment-0001.png>
More information about the Fis
mailing list