[Fis] Book Presentation. Emotions and Energy
Mariusz Stanowski
stanowskimariusz at wp.pl
Wed Apr 20 19:08:45 CEST 2022
Dear Joseph and Francesco,
I'm glad to see our conclusions converge, it confirms their validity.
Best regards
Mariusz
W dniu 2022-04-20 o 17:13, joe.brenner at bluewin.ch pisze:
> Dear Mariusz, Pedro and All,
>
> This new thread is of particular emotional and scientific interest to
> me as the son of an artist, the sculptor Michael Brenner (Siauliai,
> Lithuania, 1885 - New York, 1969). What I especially am enjoying is
> the continuity with previous FIS topics, for example in the reference
> by Mariusz to the non-metaphorical energy in art. This means to me
> that art follows the same rules of evolution as do energetic processes
> in what I have called the Logic of Energy.
>
> With regard to reality in art, I quote the statement of Stephane
> Lupasco that a work of art is successful to the extent it embodies
> both the real and the non-real in an emergent state (included middle).
>
> A corollary (not a criticism) is that an absolutely abstract, pure art
> does not exist, any more than the ideal values of 0 and 1 in complex
> processes. We can say (I think) that art is non-Kolmogorovian.
>
> From an informational perspective, Mariusz is right to emphasize how
> art compresses an enormous amount of information. What is important
> here, however, is not only the quantitative amount but its aesthetic
> value, which is, in my scheme and others, not proportional to size,
> like value in general.
>
> Best wishes,
> Joseph
>
> ----Message d'origine----
> De : stanowskimariusz at wp.pl
> Date : 19/04/2022 - 17:47 (CEST)
> À : fis at listas.unizar.es
> Objet : Re: [Fis] Book Presentation. Emotions
>
>
> Dear Pedro and FIs Colleagues,
>
> You raised an interesting and important issue of emotions in art.
> This made me think about how it is that art evokes/intensifies our
> emotions.
> From my research it follows that art (the essence of art) in the
> most general/abstract sense is the compression of information
> (contained in a work of art) thanks to which our perception saves
> energy, becomes more economical (cost-effective), e.g. a shorter
> text is more economical/compressed than a longer one containing
> the same amount of information. Thanks to this saving of energy
> (effort) we feel satisfaction, pleasure. This pleasure is related
> to our development, because saving energy obviously contributes to
> our development, which is our greatest value.
>
> These positive emotions related to our development can be
> considered abstract because they have no “direction”, they do not
> concern any concrete sphere of reality but the abstract
> development itself (increase in complexity). These absolutely
> abstract emotions, however, always occur in conjunction with more
> or less concrete realities, because we cannot experience both
> absolute abstraction and absolutely abstract (pure) art. The
> diversity of art comes from the necessity of the presence of
> different concrete realms/objects/media of reality in works of
> art. Each work/type of art speaks differently about what they have
> in common - what art is in essence, which is contrast, complexity,
> compression of information, development or value.
>
> The type of emotion depends on what specific realm of reality the
> compression of information refers to. If it is, for example, a
> landscape painted by an artist, we should like it more than an
> (uncompressed) natural landscape. The same is the case with all
> other emotions - they are intensified thanks to the compression of
> information - associated with them. The most abstract art is
> music, which is why it is often difficult for us to associate it
> with known/conscious emotions. However, connections with reality
> also occur here, mainly in the structural sphere. That is why, for
> example, different pieces of music are performed on different
> occasions. To sum up, we can say that art can be made of anything
> if we include information compression. However, compression alone
> does not tell us about the value/size of art because one can
> compress a larger (more difficult to compress/organize) area or a
> smaller area to the same degree. The compressed larger area (of
> information) has more complexity and aesthetic value, which can be
> equated with value in general - as discussed in the presentation.
>
> P.S. As a budding artist and art theorist I encountered a
> knowledge of art that relied mainly on closer and further
> metaphors. There was also a belief that only such knowledge was
> possible. For example, it was said that a work of art "gives us
> energy" which of course was treated as a metaphor. The attempt to
> understand this metaphor led me to the conclusion that it is not
> about receiving energy but about saving it and that energy is not
> a metaphor but a physical value, which was confirmed by studies in
> perception, information theory and physics.
>
> Best regards
>
> Mariusz
>
>
>
>
> W dniu 2022-04-18 o 21:20, Pedro C. Marijuan pisze:
>> Dear Mariusz and FIs Colleagues,
>>
>> May I disturb this calm vacation state and introduce some
>> "contrast"? For the sake of the discussion, the Theory & Practice
>> of Contrast presented may be considered as a pretty valid
>> approach to visual arts, also extended to a diversity of other
>> fields in science & humanities. let me warn that the
>> overextension of a decent paradigm is a frequent cause of
>> weakening the initial paradigm itself. The Darwinian cosmovision
>> is a good example. One can read in a book of Peter Atkins: /“/ /A
>> great deal of the universe does not need any explanation.
>> Elephants, for instance. Once molecules have learnt to compete
>> and to create other molecules in their own image, elephants, and
>> things resembling elephants, will in due course be found roaming
>> around the countryside/ /... / /Some of the things resembling
>> elephants will be men.” /I am not comfortable at all with that
>> type of bombastic paradigm overextension--but maybe it is my
>> problem. Finally it is the explanatory capability of the attempt
>> what counts (which in Atkins case is close to nil). In any case,
>> the co-ligation of disciplines is a tough matter not very well
>> solved/articulated yet.
>>
>> Let me change gears. My main concern with arts stems from their
>> close relationships with emotions. I remember a strange personal
>> experience. In a multidisciplinary gathering (scientists &
>> artists) time ago, there was a small concert in an ancient
>> chapel. Cello and electronic music together--great performers. In
>> the middle of the concert, for unknown reasons, I started to feel
>> sad, very sad. I was very absorbed in the music and could not
>> realize having had any other bad interfering remembrance. Then I
>> discretely looked at the person aside me, a lady. She was in
>> tears, quite openly. I realized it was the music effect. Quite a
>> few of the audience after the end of the concert were with red
>> eyes... Some years later, in some biomedical research of my team
>> on laughter (the analysis of its auditory contents as a helpful
>> tool in the diagnosis of depression) we stumbled on Manfred
>> Clynes "sentic forms". Some of the basic emotions can be clearly
>> distinguished in ad hoc acoustic patterns, as well in tactile
>> expression. (He made and sold a few gadgets about that). To make
>> a long story short, we found the most important sentic forms in
>> the sounds of laughter, including the "golden mean" in the
>> expression of joyful laughs. End of the story.
>>
>> Trying to articulate a concrete question, in what extension could
>> have been some of the arts a powerful means to elicit emotions
>> which are not so easily felt in social life? Think in the
>> liturgy of these days... such a powerful rites....
>> /
>> /
>> Best regards,
>> --Pedro
>>
>>
>> El 11/04/2022 a las 12:31, Mariusz Stanowski escribió:
>>> 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
>>>> *Sent: *Sunday, 10 April 2022 11:53
>>>> *To: *Mariusz; daniel.boyd at live.nl; "fis"
>>>> *Cc: *fis at listas.unizar.es; 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).
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Fis mailing list
>>> Fis at 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
>>> ----------
>>
>>
>> --
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>> pedroc.marijuan at gmail.compcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>
>> Editor special issue: Evolutionary dynamics of social systems
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/biosystems/special-issue/107DGX9V85V
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo
>> electrónico en busca de virus.
>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at 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
>> ----------
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at 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
> ----------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220420/f92b2e55/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list