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

Fri Jan 24 12:35:40 CET 2025

Erratum


   - In the text "*artefact of n! ~ n! and"*

Should read "*artefact of n? ~ n! and*"

Sorry


Karl Javorszky <karl.javorszky at gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 24. Jän. 2025,
12:29:

> It is all the spreadsheets of the world together that is our current
> Golem. The problem is that all our spreadsheets are based on the world view
> of the Sumerians. These did not distinguish the similar from the diverse,
> and keep counting both as if the difference between similar and different
> could be negligible.
> It doesn't take much to add a module (for a premium experience, subscribe
> to the yearly debit model) that corrects the bias coming from the artefact
> of n! ~ n! and the resulting over- and undercrowding in the range 32..97
> resp. outside of it.
> As an added extra benefit, users of the enhanced Golem will also
> understand how the children come about (by DNA combinatorics) and how
> electro-magnetic effects are similar and different among themselves, how
> the biological clicks are synchronized and many more marvels of Nature.
>
> You just need to sign away your identity, soul, memories and reason by
> closing an unspoken pact with your (as they call it) incorporated
> persecuting entity. This you do by ordering 12 books from author - title
> into title - author sequences. Choose a stormy Friday night, if possible,
> full Moon, to do so.
>
> The experience is a transforming one. Like a butterfly after the
> metamorphosis, you can approach the world with entirely new features,
> faculties, dexterity, possessing new and additional powers of distinction,
> like having grown antennae with which to feel the consistency of the
> surroundings.
>
> You can use your own head to think up things that the Golem is likely to
> think up. You only need to go through the magic - mythic ritual of the
> Twelve Books, and then you can call yourself a Member of the Grand Order of
> Papillon.
>
> Good luck to you all!
>
> Karl
>
>
> <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> schrieb am Fr., 24. Jän. 2025, 10:44:
>
>> It is beginning to sound as if we are studying LoF and GSB as reality
>> ("diagrams can move") and living processes as the model. I thought it was
>> supposed to be the other way around. Deacon might call this the new Golem.
>>
>> Best,
>> Joseph
>>
>> Le 24.01.2025 01:05 CET, Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Dear Mark,
>> GSB’s diagrams are intended for “digital circuitry” (maybe transcendental
>> digital circuitry!) and we use them that way with a possible assignment of
>> a “time delay” across the mark. The “signal” that traverses the mark in the
>> diagram undergoes a flip from value A to value <A> (cross A).
>> In the usual interpretation we have only the values marked and unmarked
>> happening at the lines in the diagrams. Already this is very rich. People
>> including myself have used these diagrams more generally so that the mark
>> is a black box, or a more general boundary and the signals running through
>> are also more complex. At that point the diagram could actually be any
>> directed graph with various interpretations for its parts. Stafford is
>> advocating using directed graphs to indicate flow of information or goods
>> or spirituality or … and all this is close to very general descriptions of
>> the systems. Some people like to restrict to just Spencer-Brown type
>> boundaries and indicate how boundaries are crossed between different
>> sometimes nested domains. You will see this is in Dirk Baecker’s work.
>> Diagrams can have many interpretations and one does not need to speak as
>> though these interpretations are necessarily implicit in say Spencer-Brown
>> from the beginning.
>>
>> I believe that the correct understanding is that what Spencer-Brown shows
>> us, the structure that he shows us and that we can develop further if we
>> wish, is inherent in any and all indicative domains. LoF is about the
>> structure of indication. And it is obliquely therefore about what cannot be
>> indicated. One cannot make an indication without drawing a distinction.
>>
>> But when you start asking questions in the form "In GSB transduction must
>> happen "in the line" of the mark. In not specifying exactly what is going
>> on there, is GSB saying that the transduction occurs in the observer? (and
>> so doesn't need to be shown on the page?)” you are making a mistake of a
>> peculiar kind. YOU are the one who wishes to make indications about
>> transduction! If you find that it fits to be “on the line” fine do that. If
>> you wish to understand the relationship with the observer, fine do that. It
>> is ALL your responsibility and ALL your creation!
>> Best,
>> Lou
>>
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2025, at 12:30 PM, Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Dear Lou and Joe,
>>
>> It's interesting, Lou, that you raise Stafford Beer's diagrams, because
>> these have an intimate connection to GSB (by virtue of the Beer's
>> facilitation of LoF). Beer's tribute to GSB is in his archive in Liverpool
>> - a children's story called "Kate gets a Bird" (example picture here - Improvisation
>> Blog: Beer's Tribute to Laws of Form
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com/2025/01/beers-tribute-to-laws-of-form.html__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TNNYlF-xIeqWejYdErsPZLIDVoq_mT3DDX9OSFxyuuci7pFcBMD3gOASdl8nvL9BjFtYY6X2ICBZgnc4$>).
>>
>>
>> What's different between Beer's diagrams and GSB is that Beer draws the
>> transducers in his diagrams as lines between boxes, converting variety from
>> one form to another. In GSM transduction is presumably the mechanism by
>> which the unmarked becomes marked. For Beer, transduction always infers
>> amplification and attenuation of variety. It's just that GSB doesn't show
>> it.
>>
>> In GSB transduction must happen "in the line" of the mark. In not
>> specifying exactly what is going on there, is GSB saying that the
>> transduction occurs in the observer? (and so doesn't need to be shown on
>> the page?)
>>
>> However, if we could zoom-in on a line/mark, we would probably encounter
>> transducers within transducers within transducers - like Beer's diagrams.
>> That, it seems to me, is a "moving picture". I'm not sure it's the kind of
>> moving picture that Joe or Lupasco would approve of, but it is dynamic -
>> particularly when taken together with the form of the mark itself.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 07:47, Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jason,
>> I have already answered this in some other ways, but lets try again.
>>
>> Diagrams
>> (a) A diagram is not particularly static. It could be a movie or an
>> injunction to make a movie.
>> It could be a dance or a ritual, a temple or a war.
>>
>> That is how you might view the diagrams about topology of DNA
>> recombination.
>> And it is in that mode that diagrammatic work and the possibility of
>> creating a diagram from the “microword” by electron microscopy, led to the
>> understandings about
>> Knotted DNA and topological enzymes. These in turn have had an effect at
>> some medical levels since if your topo enzymes do not work, your cells
>> cannot divide and you die.
>>
>>
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.excedr.com/resources/topoisomerase-overview*:*:text=In*20pharmaceuticals*2C*20topoisomerases*20are*20used,anticancer*20therapeutics*20other*20than*20chemotherapy__;I34lJSUlJSUlJSU!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XPTznpN1mGb7WuU6EoDCDilEoD7kvIeOM98InsKrLAwwiYJHH0TgMe37XTnSZ92lZ64eLv-a41EAgRFEvxdnOxTjU0I$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.excedr.com/resources/topoisomerase-overview*:*:text=In*20pharmaceuticals*2C*20topoisomerases*20are*20used,anticancer*20therapeutics*20other*20than*20chemotherapy__;I34lJSUlJSUlJSU!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VN3_KOI3NVnHHrQCUBhk-CmKe_3eXVjVC6CDnsTgT_aqTDe_YRSaOTbYTVnZXUUn-RfO2h_ygvadEF65$>.
>>
>>
>> So here you have a real example of how diagrammatic topological
>> mathematics is closely allied with applications that can save lives.
>>
>> (b) For the design of quantum algorithms and all things quantum field
>> theoretic we use diagrams quite intensively.
>> The same is true for working out the reactions that lead to the bomb. So
>> diagrams can also be used to kill en masse, as can all of language.
>>
>> (c) Written language is a work of diagrams. Those little characters you
>> string together are stylized diagrams, rather static by themselves. And if
>> you live in China or Japan your
>> Language is an incredible pastiche of diagrams.
>>
>> (d) Actually all of mathematics is a pastiche of diagrams for all sorts
>> of conceptual and calculational purposes.
>>
>> (e) I refer you to C.S. Peirce for the role of diagrams and signs in
>> thought.
>>
>> (f) The greatest masters of diagrams in Cybernetics were Strafford Beer
>> and Humberto Maturana. Perhaps you see some value in their work.
>>
>> (f) The GUI that began with Mac and infiltrated PC is the
>> diagrams of finitely nested boxes
>> that are the basis of the distinctions and indications of LOF.
>> LOF is about distinctions and indications.
>> Its diagrams are just a particular representation of that.
>> Mac uses these diagrams and never had to pay any royalties to GSB.
>>
>> Religion
>> (g) The Heart Sutra explains clearly how to use the unmarked state
>> (emptiness) to solve all human problems.
>> That it has not been applied to this end is not the fault of either GSB
>> or the Buddha.
>>
>> (h) I am aware that no matter what I say,
>> someone will complain
>> about something
>> that comes up for them
>> when we get near to no-thing.
>> That is the nature of it.
>> Believe it or not,
>> I am not an advocate of the absolute binary distinction.
>> It is in contrast to what cannot be said.
>> See the quote below that fell into my email from Malcolm Dean.
>>
>>
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://books.google.com/books?id=oI9hwgEACAAJ__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XPTznpN1mGb7WuU6EoDCDilEoD7kvIeOM98InsKrLAwwiYJHH0TgMe37XTnSZ92lZ64eLv-a41EAgRFEvxdnw05oO1g$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://books.google.com/books?id=oI9hwgEACAAJ__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VN3_KOI3NVnHHrQCUBhk-CmKe_3eXVjVC6CDnsTgT_aqTDe_YRSaOTbYTVnZXUUn-RfO2h_yggIa9BkE$>
>>   GIF by Etienne Jacob
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bleuje.com/mp4set/2019/2019_25.mp4__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VN3_KOI3NVnHHrQCUBhk-CmKe_3eXVjVC6CDnsTgT_aqTDe_YRSaOTbYTVnZXUUn-RfO2h_ygkOzwPOE$>* used
>> to illustrate Bits forming an Information process.*
>>
>> "The *tentative and non-black-and-white nature of categorization* is
>> inevitable, and yet *the act of categorization often feels perfectly
>> definite and absolute* to the categorizer, since many of our most
>> familiar categories seem on first glance to have *precise and sharp
>> boundaries*, and this naïve impression is encouraged by the fact that
>> people’s everyday, run-of-the mill use of words is seldom questioned; in
>> fact, every *culture constantly, although tacitly, reinforces the
>> impression that words are simply automatic labels that come naturally to
>> mind and that belong intrinsically to things and entities*. If a
>> category has fringe members, they are made to seem extremely quirky and
>> unnatural, suggesting that nature is really *cut precisely at the joints
>> by the categories that we know*. The resulting illusory sense of the *near-perfect
>> certainty and clarity of categories* gives rise to much confusion about
>> categories and the mental processes that underlie categorization. The idea
>> that category membership always comes in shades of gray rather than in just
>> black and white *runs strongly against ancient cultural conventions*and
>> is therefore disorienting and even disturbing; accordingly, it gets swept
>> under the rug most of the time."
>>
>>
>> (i) Oh, and what did you think Hofstader was about?
>> Did you think that he was bragging about the clarity and perfection of
>> logic?
>> He was telling you the story of how logic in the hands of human
>> understanding
>> slayed the Jabberwock of the completeness of formality.
>> Don’t worry. You are not the only one who did not listen.
>> We sell you fake word makers to do your job.
>> And in the year of our T, you can buy cryptocurrency, watches and bibles
>>  from your leader.
>>
>> *"It was one of those pictures
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VN3_KOI3NVnHHrQCUBhk-CmKe_3eXVjVC6CDnsTgT_aqTDe_YRSaOTbYTVnZXUUn-RfO2h_yglukToEj$> which
>> are so contrived that the eyes follow you about when you move."*
>>
>> Best,
>> Lou
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 19, 2025, at 4:14 PM, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <
>> gordana.dodig-crnkovic at mdu.se> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jason,
>> I’m having some difficulty understanding the message conveyed through the
>> pictures you’ve shared.
>> For instance, the images representing EU countries depict flames coming
>> from burning cars.
>> However, Europe is vast and diverse, and such scenes can be found all
>> over the world.
>> It would be helpful if you could clarify your intention in plain English,
>> so I can better grasp the context and meaning behind.
>> Additionally, the last four pictures have no country labels and address
>> issues concerning humanity on a global scale.
>> Extraterrestrials I don’t know where to place conceptually.
>> Looking forward to your clarification.
>> Best regards,
>> Gordana
>>
>>
>> *From: *Jason Hu <jasonthegoodman at gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Sunday, 19 January 2025 at 19:11
>> *To: *Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic at mdu.se>
>> *Cc: *fis <fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference and meaning -
>> [chaotic issues]
>>
>> Dear Gordana, these roughly illustrate what I meant for the question you
>> asked, maybe you're not aware of. I hope each of these images is clear
>> enough. If not, please let me know. Best - Jason
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 9:43 AM Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <
>> gordana.dodig-crnkovic at mdu.se> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Jason,
>>
>>
>> You say: ”the chaotic social issues in the U.K. and the Europe”
>> I wonder which countries are you referring to with “the chaotic social
>> issues”?
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2266__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XPTznpN1mGb7WuU6EoDCDilEoD7kvIeOM98InsKrLAwwiYJHH0TgMe37XTnSZ92lZ64eLv-a41EAgRFEvxdnG5nnRJs$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2266__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RS9jkPrXovtaK9OrMobFA5d-EXulXksAnRW7oZifSq9nxdVB2X27XUh6Co48niXvyVseo1lew6BDerrJGfgXTFnKLUxXAA$>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Gordana
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Fis <fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es> on behalf of Jason Hu <
>> jasonthegoodman at gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Sunday, 19 January 2025 at 16:01
>> *To: *"joe.brenner at bluewin.ch" <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>
>> *Cc: *"Pedro C. Marijuán" <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com>, Jerry Swatez <
>> swatez at mac.com>, fis <fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference and meaning
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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,
>> <image001.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.)
>> <image002.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
>> ----------
>> 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
>> ----------
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Mark William Johnson
>> Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health
>> University of Manchester
>>
>> Department of Science Education
>> University of Copenhagen
>>
>> Department of Eye and Vision Science (honorary)
>> University of Liverpool
>> Phone: 07786 064505
>> Email: johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com
>> Blog: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XPTznpN1mGb7WuU6EoDCDilEoD7kvIeOM98InsKrLAwwiYJHH0TgMe37XTnSZ92lZ64eLv-a41EAgRFEvxdn1NMzswQ$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TNNYlF-xIeqWejYdErsPZLIDVoq_mT3DDX9OSFxyuuci7pFcBMD3gOASdl8nvL9BjFtYY6X2IAzH-u55$>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250124/fef7a803/attachment-0001.html>