[Fis] An Unbeatable Tradition?

[Pedro C. Marijuán]

Dear All,

While watching the evolution of our discussions in this NY Lecture 
focused on the "Third Transition" I have the impression that physics 
becomes an inexorable attractor, the necessary end of any civilized 
discussion on information. Precisely, the initial arguments were about 
living organisms creating ever new ways of "getting to exist", 
adaptively constructing new-in-the-universe possibilities--with their 
exploration of the adjacent-possible going outside of the Newtonian 
paradigm... Fine, very fine.

My contention is that in the last decades we have heard many times that 
rejection of the Newtonian but seemingly we cannot advance in the 
development of truly independent views, post-Newtonian and 
non-physicalist anchored (about information). Not aspiring to any 
universality about the conceptions of this independent informational 
exploration of life--at least shouldn't it be attempted?? Once some 
basics could be cohered and decently developed, it might provide some 
interesting complementarity with the endless conundrums on its and bits 
by physicist and computerist colleagues. Michael Conrad (who in the 70s 
and 80s was already arguing about the unpicturability of enzyme 
function) put an interesting comment: /_"When we look at a biological 
system we are looking at the face of the underlying physics of the 
universe"_/ (in BioSystems, 38, 1996, p.108). Quite enigmatic. So, an 
unexpected convergence might be found finally--but not mandating it at 
the very beginning.

As I briefly argued days ago, the adjacent possible may be considered in 
a variety of time-scales. The infamous "What is it to be done?" (in 
Spanish, the concise "Qué hacer?" ) may be repeated for cells, for 
organisms, for humans, for societies... Or in other more frivolous 
words, "Qué será, será... the future's not ours to see". No wonder that 
all these kinds of informational creatures are endlessly looking for 
"signals", to march towards truly adaptive adjacent possibles. Our new 
knowledge on Prokaryotic signaling systems, on how they are intertwined 
with the advancement of the life cycle, points exactly in that 
direction: exploring the external/internal environment so to self-orient 
towards adaptive outcomes. They were the First Ones. Our own nervous 
system continuously scans the external and the internal, and mixes up 
with an elaborate arrangement of emotional resources and socialization 
cues so to do more or less the same, achieving viable life courses, 
etc.etc. Our own societies are involved in dire prospects and strange 
policy navigation towards the adjacent--what? Possible? Impossible? 
Disastrous? Inevitable?

The lack of an informational cosmovision is patent. It was already 
evident for Ortega y Gasset in the 1930s: /"The confusion on the 
terrible public conflicts of the present stems //in good part //from the 
incongruence between the perfection of our ideas on physical phenomena 
and the painful back-warded state of the 'moral sciences'--//about that, 
//both the politician and the physicist are at the very height of the 
barber" /(in Revolt of the Masses, 1930s).

Before putting an end, I have found pretty interesting (maybe 
converging) recent comments on logics by Joseph, Eric, Plamen... 
Unfortunately the "reality" of the life cycle is always maintained 
perfectly invisible (or partially entered via some sanitized surrogates).

Thanking your attention,

Best --Pedro



-- 
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!Rf7U94d6MrR4Ofy1SS8jHmdL3Sk4dzXYz3mEwa1TRooeL_p8hLP3KE-qpDIpWVfUvwWzbyGVrXhY54XKy5cAN6FR23qW$ 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240122/ab4d96cc/attachment.html>