[Fis] Book Presentation. The Interpersonal domain
Loet Leydesdorff
loet at leydesdorff.net
Fri Apr 22 08:05:26 CEST 2022
Dear Joe and colleagues:
>I am not sure where the error lies here, but Loet seems to have taken a
>quite limited view of the reality of the interpersonal domain. It does
>not exist like a table, but there are other options which give it
>objective properties other than as a pure "construct".
I reacted primarily to an assumed consensus.
I did not say that these constructs are "pure constructs": the networks
can be considered as observable retention. However, our sense and
communication of beauty and our thoughts are not are not objective. I
don't consider this as a "limited view of the reality of the
interpersonal domain". On the contrary, the interpersonal domain is much
richer than its objectively observable instantiations.
>The chief one of these for me are the potentialities in a process view
>of nature. The inclusion of potentiality in the description of the
>evolution of natural processes enables a clear connection to the
>potential properties of information - those that are absent, exactly in
>Terry Deacon's term.
Yes, the absent options can be measured as redundancy. I asked you
before whether you would agree. There is a finite number of alternatives
in the imagination. You call this potentiality if I correctly
understand.
>Working backwards, intersubjective intentionality, to the extent that
>it is expressed in human beings has a real existence and must be
>considered cognitively objective as well as subjective accordingly.
I don't agree with this inference; it entails a positivistic turn. The
word combination "cognitively objective" may be the problem. Res
cogitans is different from res extensa. Therefore, we can test hypotesis
in terms of observed versus expected. Without such a design, the
knowledge generated remains subjective.
"expressed in human beings" reduces the communication to behavior in an
objectivistic reality. The issue is "what is expressed," and "what is
evolving"? (Boulding). The human carriers live in the tension between
potential and actual. "Living" is biological and not specifically human.
Best, Loet
PS. Stan: it seems to me that we more or less agree. L.
>As some of you know, I have referred frequently to the reality of
>potentiality in gravitation, chemical reactions (oxidation/reduction
>potential), and cognition. The role of such aspects of reality seems to
>me to have been ignored or trivialized, but I think that many of our
>recurrent problems might benefit from their inclusion in the debate.
We need to address redundancy generated by the looping of information
when provided with meaning. Otherwise, these ignored aspects remain
subject of philosophical (pre-paradigmatic) speculation.
>Best regards,
>Joseph
>>----Message d'origine----
>>De : loet en leydesdorff.net
>>Date : 21/04/2022 - 12:30 (CEST)
>>À : karl.javorszky en gmail.com, fis en listas.unizar.es
>>Objet : Re: [Fis] Book Presentation. Emotions
>>
>>Dear Karl and colleagues,
>>
>>Before you conclude to consensus, perhaps, a bit of error should be
>>removed:
>>
>>>Pedro’s story about the empathic, nonverbal communication happening
>>>between humans, who share each other’s emotional state, drives a
>>>point home that is clearly observable in a fashion where one can
>>>relate his experiences and be sure that others will understand him.
>>>The main point is that art is interpersonally communicable, and by
>>>this criterium can be shown to be a part of objective reality.
>>>
>>I don't think so: It is not "objective reality" but "intersubjective
>>intentionality." This has huge consequences.
>>
>>>(We refer to the agreement that if a concept is referable to
>>>interpersonally and the participants agree on what they have
>>>experienced in a common fashion, that concept has an inter-individual
>>>existence, which is then by definition a part of the objective
>>>reality.)
>>>
>>The interpersonal domain does not "exist" in the sense that a table
>>may exist. It remains a construct. These constructs have the status of
>>hypotheses. They can be tested against observations of things which
>>may exist.
>>
>>Best, Loet
>>
>>
>>_______________
>>
>><https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030599508>Loet Leydesdorff
>>
>>
>>
>>"The Evolutionary Dynamics of Discusive Knowledge"
>><https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-59951-5>(Open
>>Access)
>>
>>Professor emeritus, University of Amsterdam
>>
>>Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)
>>
>>loet en leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
>>
>>http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en
>>
>>ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7835-3098;
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Examples abound, where signs and symbols are understood
>>>interpersonally in a common fashion. Human new-borns share the
>>>instinctive ability to recognise the optical picture of a smiley
>>>(😊), and of the pitch of the human voice (they prefer alto to
>>>soprano to baritone to bass). We use the term ‘supra-normal stimuli’
>>>to refer to such constellations of stimuli that appear to be
>>>hard-wired into our genetic instinctive predispositions. Animals are
>>>evidently in possession of large inventories of potential
>>>supra-normal stimuli (‘triggering inputs’).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The hypothesis is that there exist structures (constellations of
>>>facts) in Nature which evolution has made use of to select those
>>>individuals which recognise such to their advantage. These structures
>>>are a) communicable inter-individually, b) describable by means of a
>>>language that is independent of its speaker: that is, such impression
>>>patterns are objectively existing. Art is a different name for
>>>supra-normal stimuli.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where does art begin and how does art differ to a random collection
>>>of facts? For formal reasons, one should include sunshine among the
>>>constituents of art, as evidenced by the heliotaxia of sunflowers. It
>>>is evident, that supra-normal stimuli, that is: art, can come in a
>>>wide variety of articulations, be it the mating dance of cranes, the
>>>melody of frogs’ chants, the form of nests built by weaver birds or
>>>the color patterns of octopus. (If memory serves right, some 50 years
>>>ago, girls had a tendency of emitting a fragrance that caused the
>>>writer of these lines to want to be near them.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Art is a variation on a theme by Nature, where there exists an
>>>underlying theme (the idealised target value) to which the actual
>>>performance comes near, nearer or smack in the ideal centre. We
>>>suppose that there exists an ideal form for performing the artwork
>>>(the ultimate Song of A Lonely Frog, an optimal Hole in A Tree to
>>>Invite Females to Lay Eggs In, etc), and that those individuals which
>>>come nearest to the ideal variant have the best chances of
>>>progeniture.
>>>
>>>Here again, Discrepancies Between Ideal and Observed Values show us
>>>Art to be nothing different to other forms of Information.
>>>Information is the extent of being otherwise, and Art is in its
>>>essence nothing but a demonstration of an Observed Value, to which we
>>>look (imagine, project, hallucinate) into the background the Expected
>>>Value.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The only epistemological difficulty comes from our traditional
>>>cultural convention, namely that Nature – and as such, the Background
>>>to everything and all – is not pre-structured. During Renaissance, in
>>>the age of emerging Rationality, the decision has been taken to
>>>define that there exist no a-priori existing structural relations
>>>among the concepts that we use to build up our world view. This
>>>decision was practical and helpful at that time, because by this
>>>cleaning of the slate we have eliminated all superstition,
>>>anthropogenic explanations, religious teleological systems of
>>>beliefs, witchcraft and sorcery at the same time. Yet, it appears we
>>>have cleaned the table too much. Leptons, quarks, charms, chemical
>>>attraction, gravitation, etc., and also the existence of artwork in
>>>the living subsection of Nature show that there indeed do exist
>>>relations among logical tokens, even if we create such logical tokens
>>>as nondescript as we can, in the form of natural numbers. Even if we
>>>dream up a world view that is made up of synthetic, unform,
>>>nondescript units, even in that environment, a-priori existing
>>>relations pop up, as soon as we do anything with them which a child
>>>would do when bored, like ordering, sorting ad resorting these same
>>>tokens. We cannot avoid acknowledging the existence of a-priori
>>>relations connecting in manifold ways the tokens we make up our world
>>>of. (Et expellas furcam, natura recurrit.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Summary: Art is shown to be one of readings of the idea that there
>>>are at least two readings of the same collection of symbols that make
>>>up our world view. In regulation theory, one speaks of sets of target
>>>values vs sets of actual values. In art, the set of target values is
>>>created by our neurology and serves as the background, to which we
>>>relate the set of actual, observed values.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Am Mi., 20. Apr. 2022 um 17:09 Uhr schrieb Francesco Rizzo <
>>>13francesco.rizzo en gmail.com>:
>>>>Dear Mauriusz,
>>>>
>>>>I take the liberty of telling you that in Rizzo F., An economy of hope for the multi-ethnic city,Franco Angeli, Milan 2007, pp. 309-313, we find paragraph 7.1 cultural heritage between energy and
>>>>cultural heritage between energy and information. If you have the opportunity, read it and you will see how consonances there are between Yours and my thoughts.
>>>> many
>>>>see how many consonances there are between Yours and my thoughts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fig. 7.1
>>>>
>>>>In base alla == qualsiasi cosa oscilli con frequenza n, può presentarsi solo in unità discrete di massa . Nel mondo della natura particelle e oscillazioni di campo non sono cose diverse [4; 12]. Nel campo dell’economia i valori si valutano secondo le loro differenze e variazioni, oscillazioni impropriamente ritenute «volatilità».
>>>>Le trasformazioni della materia possono manifestare l’energia immagazzinata al suo interno (relatività ristretta). La struttura dello spazio è influenzata dalla massa o dall’energia degli oggetti qualunque sia la posizione in cui si collocano. Più massa e/o energia si concentrano in un punto, più lo spazio e il tempo si curvano intorno ad esso (relatività generale). Albert Einstein intuisce con geniale fantasia (qualcuno sostiene che egli abbia utilizzato abbondantemente il pensiero di Henri Poincarè) che tutta la «massa-energia» in un’area sia in relazione funzionale con lo «spazio-tempo» vicino o, con uno schematismo simbolico, che energia-massa = spazio-tempo. La E e la m di E = mּc2 divengono due elementi che stanno su un unico lato di questa nuova e più profonda equazione. Tale generalizzazione, con la stessa mediazione o finzione simbolica, può estendersi con qualche cautela e superando il tarlo dell’incredulità irriducibile, alla formula di capitalizzazione V = Rnּ1/r legata da un’appassionante associazione isomorfica con l’equazione della relatività ristretta. Anzi, l’isomorfismo fisico-economico delle due formule viene convalidato e reso più convincente proprio da questa interpretazione estensiva che dà ampiezza ed applicazione superiore alla generalizzazione, assegnando allo spazio-tempo una funzione di cerniera epistemica tra le due accoppiate: valore-energia (monetaria) dell’economia e materia-energia (fisica) della natura. Si può scrivere quindi: Rn = Vּr = energia-massa = spazio-tempo = mּc2 = E oppure 1/r = V/Rn = spazio-tempo = energia-massa = m/E = 1/c2.
>>>>La trasformazione di un flusso di redditi in un fondo di valore, operata dal co-efficiente di capitalizzazione 1/r, manifesta la dualità dinamica dell’essere valore e dell’essere reddito di un bene capitale o dell’essere spazio (integrazione) e dell’essere punto (derivazione) che si rivela sorprendentemente analoga alla relazione tra l’essere materia e l’essere energia della stessa realtà fisica secondo l’equazione della relatività ristretta. La somiglianza delle due form(-ul)e matematiche appare incredibilmente forte alla luce della musicale e misteriosa uni-dualità spazio-tempo che è fondamentale sia per la capitalizzazione o solidificazione dei redditi (economici) che dell’energia (naturale). Come la natura corpuscolare e la natura ondulatoria sono due forme (diverse), una implicante l’altra in un approccio uni-duale alla stessa realtà fisica, l’essere flusso di redditi e l’essere fondo di capitale sono due forme (diverse) costituenti un’interpretazione uni-duale della stessa realtà economica che può rap-presentarsi solo in unità discrete di valore Rnּ1/r. E dato che l’energia è in-formazione della natura e l’in-formazione è energia della cultura il triangolo della figura 7.1 può essere ri-scritto secondo la figura 7.2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Fig. 7.2
>>>>
>>>>La meta-dualità essere-energia ed essere-in-formazione rap-presenta e com-pone in maniera trans-disciplinare le dualità: essere-segno ed essere-merce o essere-flusso (di redditi) ed essere-fondo (di valore) dei beni (culturali) che sono beni-moneta privilegiati; essere-energia ed essere-materia od essere-particella ed essere-oscillazione di campo delle «cose» (naturali). Beninteso, affinché non si prendano abbagli gli accostamenti analogici tra le leggi della natura e le leggi dell’economia debbono evitare ogni tentazione di identicità, sfuggire a qualunque identificazione concettuale e non farsi ingannare da alcuna automatica trasposizione. Credere nell’armonia meravigliosa che governa il mondo (naturale e sociale) non significa s-cadere nella con-fusione o nel con-formismo naturale e culturale, esistenziale e conoscitivo.
>>>>
>>>>3. L’ateniese Takis intende l’opera d’arte come simbolo di energia. Stephen Hawking rivedendo la sua teoria sostiene che i buchi neri non si limitano a perdere massa attraverso una radiazione di energia, ma evaporano o rilasciano informazione. Essi non distruggono mai completamente quello che fagocitano. Con-tengono un’informazione, non casuale e indefinibile, sulla materia di cui sono fatti che con-sente di predirne il futuro. In una relazione del 1998 [7], ripresa nel 2005 [8], Hawking studia la possibilità di collegare i campi gravitazionali (che sembravano eliminare ogni in-formazione) all’entropia e alla predicibilità del futuro che la seconda legge della termodinamica permette. In tal modo i buchi neri non evaporano o irradiano un’energia invisibile o enigmatica priva di informazione come se fossero delle inafferrabili e indecifrabili entità cosmiche, e non s-fuggono alla (mia) super-legge della combinazione creativa (anche se talvolta stupefacente) di energia e in-formazione. I buchi neri possono considerarsi quindi come speciali scatole nere o magici processi di tras-informazione produttivi (i cui input e output sono materia, energia e informazione) e prospettici.
>>>>L’energia e l’in-formazione costituiscono le due sostanze primarie della vita e della scienza che implicano «affermazioni complementari» non identiche all’una o all’altra delle due «affermazioni alternative» che presuppongono scelte binarie del tipo 0 o 1. Ad ogni affermazione complementare corrisponde uno stato o «potenzialità coesistente» che in una certa misura contiene anche gli altri «stati coesistenti». Queste considerazioni di fisica quantistica, riconducibili al pensiero di Carl von Weizsäcker e stimolate da Werner Heisenberg, richiamano la logica fuzzy [9, pp. 214-7].
>>>>
>>>>Caro Mariuz
>>>>il nichilismo economico, sotteso dall’ideologia utilitaristica, esalta i prezzi e annulla i valori. La mia nuova concezione economica è basata sulla teoria del valore-informazione. Le opere d’arte non valgono perché sono utili, ma perché sono dotate dibellezza in senso generale. E la bellezza è regolata dalla legge delle leggi dell’informazione
>>>>Ancora una volta Ti dico bravo, perché Ti intendi di economia dell’arte o di arte dell’economia.
>>>>Un abbraccio
>>>>Francesco
>>>>Dear Mariusz,
>>>> on the theory of information-value. Works of art are not worthwhile because they are useful, but because they are endowed with beauty in a general sense. And beauty is governed by the law of information laws.
>>>>Once again I tell you good, because you understand the economics of art or the art of economics.
>>>>A hug.
>>>>Francis
>>>>
>>>>Il giorno mar 19 apr 2022 alle ore 17:47 Mariusz Stanowski <
>>>>stanowskimariusz en wp.pl> ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>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 en bluewin.ch
>>>>>>>>Sent: Sunday, 10 April 2022 11:53
>>>>>>>>To: Mariusz; daniel.boyd en live.nl; "fis"
>>>>>>>>Cc: fis en listas.unizar.es; daniel.boyd en 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 en wp.pl
>>>>>>>>>Date : 10/04/2022 - 08:35 (CEST)
>>>>>>>>>À : daniel.boyd en live.nl, fis en 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
>>>>>>>>>>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).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>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 en 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 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
>>>>>>>----------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>Pedro C. Marijuán
>>>>>>Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>>>>>>pedroc.marijuan en 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>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>><https://rich-v02.bluewin.ch:443/#m_5682249944001950559_m_5272512800448995304_m_3587540073929156095_m_5524230409268817557_m_1568771938713710198_m_-1867140357341046228_m_-6991387430563402867_m_-3899873563229104252_m_-6893692261083655475_m_3661071338159238558_m_-6239538321860397427_m_-894582114354655215_m_1957764947159077325_m_5502420876881491567_m_8594044412499457540_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>Fis mailing list
>>>>>>Fis 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
>>>>>>----------
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>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
>>>>>----------
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>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/20220422/bb64f395/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/20220422/bb64f395/attachment-0001.png>
More information about the Fis
mailing list