[Fis] Where does Pedro place his bet?

[joe.brenner at bluewin.ch]

Dear All,
This message from Pedro, especially the last bit, brings home the problems of trying to use categories of any sort.  
The question of whether logics provide a refuge has two answers: standard logics of propositions, even paraconsistent logic do not; a logic of change or physical processes might. There is a  relation to be explored here to the notions of non-existence in Eastern logics. The relation to information was captured by Terry Deacon through his notion of incompleteness.
 This message is also incomplete, and people looking for complete answers which do not require change in standard notions of everything "from time to space" may be disappointed. Pedro's best bet is therefore one I am looking forward to learning about.
So far, most of the few comments I have received on the above amount to an expression of incomprehension. May I still hope for more?
Best wishes, 
Joseph 




Envoyé avec l’application blue News & E-Mail

Le 25 février 2024 à 20:24, "Pedro C. Marijuán" <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com> a écrit
>Dear List,
>
>Thanks, Carlos, for all  your well-crafted responses. Nevertheless, 
>perhaps some of your remarks on information look to me rather
>confusing, 
>sort of omni-comprehensive, but at the same time strictly glued to 
>language. /"And then we can explore “laws of information” that apply to
>
>everything we can express (because if you can express it, by definition
>
>it is information)"./ Thus, living beings non-endowed with language, 
>only relate to information if there is a human observer describing
>them? 
>And the "invisible hand" of markets? I don't know, probably that's not 
>what you were implying.
>
>> The world (ontology) cannot be fully described (epistemology) anyhow.
>
>> Our descriptions are always finite, the world is always infinite (you
>
>> can always describe more aspects of it). The question is which
>limited 
>> description will be more useful for a given purpose. And the topic of
>
>> this month is precisely trying to come up with a description useful 
>> for describing living systems. And perhaps this will be useful also 
>> for intelligence and complex systems in general.
>Our scientific descriptions of the many worlds around are sort of a 
>nightmare (around 6,000 sci. fields--in general they have been doubling
>
>with every passing generation after the industrial revolution)  The 
>first part of your assertion looks to me quite cogent, but the second 
>part could be written the other way around: what we see is plenty of 
>approaches from computer sci, AI, complex systems, etc. that are 
>deployed towards the biological, far more than from the other
>direction. 
>As quite often is reminded in this list, physicalism and computerism 
>have the upper hand--no problem, we are used to it. The pity is that 
>that way of thinking is aped in many other fields where it really 
>opaques comprehension...
>> Btw, physics and logics are just other sets of descriptions, but some
>
>> confuse them with reality.
>
>I am reminded the "dream" that Eric told days ago--nice piece. But 
>thinking about it, I was lead to distinguish, connecting with its 
>message, the /logics/ from the /rationality/, the /w//ay of thinking/, 
>and the /way of life/.  Think please for a while in each one 
>independently and in the whole relationships between them... It is 
>interesting that for materialists the latter determined the 
>superstructural mental, while for idealists it was the opposite. The 
>"rational" has been strongly contested in recent decades  (eg, Kahneman
>
>and Tversky S1 and S2) particularly in economics. So, in spite of its 
>multiplicities and controversies, logics still is an acceptable 
>refuge--or is it?  And philosophy(ies)? My own bet is somewhere else.
>
>Best--Pedro
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> ----------
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Este correo electrónico ha sido analizado en busca de virus por el
>software antivirus de Avast.
>https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.avast.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!T7iMQXdOnJU_mu51hnFswQmd7mWiVzSB6YrPgjioPoliX4lT5brT019ZFNVvcdDF-vjWjNZSEtjXH_12YMiUa691QvL9$
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240226/40a874fd/attachment.html>