[Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference and meaning

Eric Werner eric.werner at oarf.org
Sun Jan 19 19:28:36 CET 2025


Dear Lou and all,

I don't mean to trivialize the problem.

Lou and GSB (and many others) attempt to understand one of the deepest 
problems of philosophy, science and our existence, namely:

Why is there anything at all?

It is a question that has bothered me since it first came to me when in 
8th grade, never to have even remotely come up with a solution.

That may explain my superficial remarks on religion. A kind of self 
defense and helplessness when faced with the depth of the problem.

So thank you Lou, and I am sure many of you as well, for trying to face 
this dilemma of our coming to be, seemingly out of nothing.

-Eric

On 1/19/25 5:18 PM, Eric Werner wrote:
> The problem with with a religion. It’s not very practical for many use 
> cases it’s meant for tho eternal.
> In the beginning, it was the word and the word was God
> Sound familiar?
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jan 19, 2025, at 16:01, Jason Hu <jasonthegoodman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> I second Joe strongly here, "*they are a possibly misleading way of 
>> describing natural physical processes, including and especially 
>> cognition."*
>>
>> I used to be a fan of Hofstadter's "Gedel, Escher, Bach" in my 
>> younger years, but gradually started realizing that type of thoughts 
>> might be an intellectual trap - an endless rabbit hole that leads to 
>> just self-entertainment or self-glory but no useful actions, no tools 
>> for handyman to do everyday work to benefit normal people.
>>
>> Well, *"I have just written may not be completely correct (what is?)" 
>> *so I welcome any of you to prove me wrong or even change my mind, by 
>> offering some solid example of how GSB thinking has 
>> been beneficial to solve/resolve/dissolve the huge conflicts going on 
>> in the Middle East, or the deep divide among the Americans between 
>> Trump supporters and Trump haters, or the chaotic social issues in 
>> the U.K. and the Europe. If no such examples exist so far, at least 
>> point out to me how it could be, under what conditions?
>>
>> Best regards - Jason
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 3:29 AM <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear Lou and All,
>>     Just some comments to explain my resistence to GSB and much of
>>     Lou's otherwise essential work: the diagrams used do not nove;
>>     they are "eternal". They accurately reflect /only epistemic
>>     self-reference/ and not recursion or ontic hetero-reference.
>>     Therefore, they are a possibly misleading way of describing
>>     natural physical processes, including and especially cognition.
>>     Information applies to the content of the diagram below, but the
>>     mental "movement" from figure to ground and back, and its logic,
>>     is at a low level of complexity. Information more broadly.
>>     however, is easily seen as a dynamic phenomenon, embodying and
>>     describing /change./
>>     I submit that what I have just written may not be completely
>>     correct (what is?), but that it has received insufficient serious
>>     attention.
>>     Thank you and best wishes,
>>     Joseph
>>>     Le 19.01.2025 02:08 CET, Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> a
>>>     écrit :
>>>     Dear Karl,
>>>     <VasesFaces copy.png>
>>>     Background.
>>>     Figure and Ground.
>>>     Yes.
>>>     And in starting with the idea of a distinction one needs to have
>>>     an unfettered notion of background.
>>>     That notion is emptiness.
>>>     The empty set is placed against a background of non-membership
>>>     and it has no members.
>>>                                          { }
>>>     The GSB mark is a relative of the empty set and stands for a
>>>     distinction and for that state obtained by crossing from emptiness
>>>     (the first distinction, if you will.)
>>>     <Mark.png>
>>>     As soon as one fixes on a representation of a concept, that
>>>     representation has more properties, more inherent and indicated
>>>     distinctions, than the concept “itself”.
>>>     Thus the curly brackets of the representation of the empty set,
>>>     { },  are not necessary for the concept. And the right angle
>>>     bracket is not necessary for the mark.
>>>     We sometimes use < > for the mark as it is useful in typing, but
>>>     execrable as an icon since < > is two characters representing
>>>     one distinction. And so it goes.
>>>     It is in fact very powerful to understand the backgrounds that
>>>     are appropriate for discourse and keep them as minimal as possible.
>>>     In LOF, GSB uses the notational plane as a background, not the
>>>     line.
>>>     This has some eplstemological advantages and some drawbacks.
>>>     After studying any indication set-up it is useful to examine
>>>     what kind of background is being used.
>>>     Mathematical advances and scientific advances have resulted from
>>>     such scrutiny.
>>>     At the level of the Heart Sutra the concept of emptiness can be
>>>     the basis for (everything).
>>>     Very best,
>>>     Lou
>>>
>>>
>>>>     On Jan 18, 2025, at 3:55 PM, Karl Javorszky
>>>>     <karl.javorszky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>     Remark: this is usually called BACKGROUND.
>>>>
>>>>     Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 18. Jän.
>>>>     2025, 22:43:
>>>>
>>>>         Dear Pedro,
>>>>         It depends on how you look at it.
>>>>         Consider the Heart Sutra.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         In Mathematics, all forms are brought forth from emptiness.
>>>>         { }
>>>>         {{}}
>>>>         {{},{{}}}
>>>>>>>>         Emptiness can mean “that which is not (yet) articulated or
>>>>         indicated”.
>>>>         At the bottom of what is indicated is what is not indicated.
>>>>         What is not indicated is not marked.
>>>>         Emptiness is a word for what is not marked.
>>>>         Very best,
>>>>         Lou
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>         On Jan 18, 2025, at 3:05 PM, Pedro C. Marijuán
>>>>>         <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>         Dear Lou and List,
>>>>>         Thanks to you (and Eric) for the thought-provoking
>>>>>         exchange. Along it, I was reminded of a maverick approach
>>>>>         to distinctions I read long ago. It was pointing to a set
>>>>>         with N elements carrying multiple "signs" or "marks". The
>>>>>         distinctions between these elements carrying heterogeneous
>>>>>         signs within the set were expressed by means of
>>>>>         partitions, actually multidimensional partitions. Other
>>>>>         related authors tried to systematically obtain and compile
>>>>>         those multidimensional partitions via a few 'logical'
>>>>>         principles (economy, parsimony, symmetry) applied to the
>>>>>         pruning of redundant signs, and subsequently the
>>>>>         'canonical' multid.partitions could be obtained 'almost'
>>>>>         algorithmically (at least for small N)... etc. etc. At
>>>>>         least, in my non-mathematical mind I could make some
>>>>>         practical sense of this distinctional stuff (in which I
>>>>>         was interested regarding cellular signaling systems and
>>>>>         the way receptors combinations were occupied by different
>>>>>         signaling molecules).
>>>>>         I disagree with the closing statement (THE FORM WE TAKE TO
>>>>>         EXIST ARISES FROM FRAMING NOTHING), because it situates
>>>>>         itself above the conditions of any previous kind of
>>>>>         existence. IMO it is a Barón of Münchhausen's type of
>>>>>         statement. Maths as I pointed days ago inherit the inner
>>>>>         dynamics of our sensorimotor transformations from which
>>>>>         language developed. Maths, as it has often been
>>>>>         recognized, is a particular form of collective language.
>>>>>         It partakes of an enormous historical accumulation of
>>>>>         thought-experimentation and pruning, particularly trying
>>>>>         to capture the transformations of the external world. The
>>>>>         implicit subject is always "us", the writer plus the
>>>>>         concerned learned community of 'practitioners' of that
>>>>>         particular math 'dialect'. And concerning distinctions, it
>>>>>         obviously includes the possibility of entering into the
>>>>>         scheme of other subjects (as Eric points) endowed with
>>>>>         genuine distinctional capability--from living cells to...
>>>>>         Anyhow, in spite of the disagreement, your message was a
>>>>>         great reading. Thanks for those GSB quotations.
>>>>>         Concerning Kate's recent emphasis on E. coli's two
>>>>>         component system in charge of motion control, the
>>>>>         discoveries on prokaryotic signaling during last two
>>>>>         decades have left a richer panorama. For instance, E. coli
>>>>>         counts with about 100 one-component-systems (1CSs), 28 of
>>>>>         the 2 CSs class, and just two of the 3 CSs (actually one
>>>>>         of them is the motion control). The 1CSs are more simple
>>>>>         and primitive (evolutionarily), and slower, with respect
>>>>>         to the faster, more specific, and more evolved 2CSs, which
>>>>>         in their turn are less complex and sophisticate than 3CSs,
>>>>>         which are applied to the treatment of very important
>>>>>         signals than need a further layer of intervening
>>>>>         processes. It always depend on the whole advancement of
>>>>>         the cell cycle, or life history, which endowment the
>>>>>         bacterium will contain... Anyhow, the whole signaling
>>>>>         panorama of 'primitive' cells is fascinating--it is indeed
>>>>>         the beginning of biological sensing & communication.
>>>>>         By the way, Jason, thanks for that amazing report on the
>>>>>         proton innards.
>>>>>         Greetings to all,
>>>>>         --Pedro
>>>>>         El 17/01/2025 a las 21:57, Louis Kauffman escribió:
>>>>>>         Dear Eric,
>>>>>>         There is a confusion here that is quite natural.
>>>>>>         LOF is a book of mathematics and philosophy. It discusses
>>>>>>         the idea of a distinction.
>>>>>>         When one takes a mathematical approach one attempts to
>>>>>>         begin with very simple structures and
>>>>>>         explore outward into complexity. LOF dwells on the
>>>>>>         possibility of one distinction throughout the whole book.
>>>>>>         “We take as given the idea of distinction and the idea of
>>>>>>         indication
>>>>>>         and that one cannot make an indication without drawing a
>>>>>>         distinction.
>>>>>>         We take therefore the form of distinction for the form.”
>>>>>>         As such LOF is not concerned with where or how the
>>>>>>         distinction is made.
>>>>>>         In the same way, a mathematics book about number is not
>>>>>>         concerned with particular representations of numbers.
>>>>>>         Of course we have these concerns and we want to
>>>>>>         understand more and more about numbers in general
>>>>>>         and we feel that some representations will help and some
>>>>>>         ways to use signs and symbols will help.
>>>>>>         The same is the case with the idea of distinction.
>>>>>>         GSB does have his ontology (or lack thereof!).
>>>>>>         Some people are made a bit nervous by declarations that
>>>>>>         the world is created from nothing.
>>>>>>         But you can investigate this if you are not annoyed by it.
>>>>>>         What could ’things’ be ‘made of’?
>>>>>>         If you’re bothered, then you are bothered.
>>>>>>         Mathematics is similarly annoying
>>>>>>         as we have systematically shown
>>>>>>         how to build it all from nothing
>>>>>>         but the act of collecting/distinguishing
>>>>>>         and the act of creating signs and indications.
>>>>>>         Everyone has their niche of ideas and ways that they want
>>>>>>         to continue to use.
>>>>>>         In the approach of a big general idea, what we already
>>>>>>         “know" looks too good be abandoned,
>>>>>>         and so we keep demanding that the other talk in our
>>>>>>         language.
>>>>>>         GSB created new language.
>>>>>>         Wittgenstein pointed out the ontological consequences of
>>>>>>         the limitations of language.
>>>>>>         Both are very challenging.
>>>>>>         Neither are making religions.
>>>>>>         These are anti-religions.
>>>>>>         Best,
>>>>>>         Lou
>>>>>>         THE FORM WE TAKE TO EXIST ARISES FROM FRAMING NOTHING.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         On Jan 17, 2025, at 6:19 AM, Eric Werner
>>>>>>>         <eric.werner at oarf.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         Dear Lou,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         To point 4. Yes, I admit it was sarcasm. To me a
>>>>>>>         distinction requires a subject. And that subject's
>>>>>>>         neuro-hardware or firmware or software limits the
>>>>>>>         distinctions that that subject can make. For example,
>>>>>>>         the distinctions made by an ant, a frog, a cat or a
>>>>>>>         human may be quite different.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         I realize you are probably the world top expert on
>>>>>>>         Spencer Brown so you probably have a reply. But my
>>>>>>>         instinct is that GSB is claiming too much by using
>>>>>>>         'distinction' as an ONTOLOGICAL or metaphysical
>>>>>>>         foundation for what requires a subjective capacity. OK,
>>>>>>>         this last sentence is not fully clear, but I think GSB
>>>>>>>         is confusing subject and being.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         As for the sarcasm, it is a more personal emotional
>>>>>>>         reaction having little to do with you. Although you may
>>>>>>>         unknowingly have had a role in the matter through your
>>>>>>>         publications. I have friends who study early
>>>>>>>         Wittgenstein and GSB as if their texts were biblical
>>>>>>>         texts. Going to the library every day to read the
>>>>>>>         Tractatus and LOF like a disciple doing his or her
>>>>>>>         religious studies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         At the onset of puberty and the ability to consciously
>>>>>>>         reason, my mother took each of us into the kitchen and
>>>>>>>         taught us to be critical of the bible, both the old and
>>>>>>>         new testament. We were raised Christian but there were
>>>>>>>         also Jews in my mother's ancestry. Who knows why, but I
>>>>>>>         have maintained my religious skepticism and hence my
>>>>>>>         perhaps inappropriate reaction when I smell religiosity.
>>>>>>>         Apologies dear Lou.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         In spite of my critical attitude, I do believe there is
>>>>>>>         more to the universe. There may be a God or Gods and
>>>>>>>         angels. There may be life after death. Life is always
>>>>>>>         surprising. So, I am open to that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         -Eric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>         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
>>>>>>         ----------
>>>>>
>>>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>>>         Fis mailing list
>>>>>         Fis at listas.unizar.es
>>>>>         http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>>>         ----------
>>>>>         INFORMACI�N SOBRE PROTECCI�N DE DATOS DE CAR�CTER PERSONAL
>>>>>
>>>>>         Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de
>>>>>         correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>>>>>         Puede encontrar toda la informaci�n 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 est� suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud.
>>>>>         puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicaci�n 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
>>>>         ---------- 
>>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     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
>>>     ---------- 
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     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
>>     ----------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> ----------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> ----------
-- 
/Dr. Eric Werner, FLS
Oxford Advanced Research Foundation
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WhlhKYVcpsgfg-h5ncGjLXFfB1PP_kliq0_PIUUJgmVjQpVlTDrf5ZNxFXZv15paB6X_cr5ULAt7OwIT91RHNEw$ 


/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250119/7edb6a64/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Fis mailing list