[Fis] Fwd: Re: [Not Fis] Gravity, Holism, and Biological Information Processing--Bill Miller's contribution: the "It" of a machine, truth and trust

[joe.brenner at bluewin.ch]

> Dear Mark,
>  
> If you are tending in the direction you say, I suggest you might quarantine Bhaskar and his so-called Critical Realism. The following, taken from my Section on this subject from my Philosophy in Reality may suggest why
>  
> The work of Bhaskar can be subsumed under the term of critical realism, seen as a non-Marxist continuation of the Frankfurt school of philosophy. While the objectives of this movement are laudable, we see a structural weakness in Bhaskar’s particular extension of it, namely, a form of transcendentalism that, to a non-reductionist realist seems naïve. According to LIR, if dualism is “hard-wired” into reality, then the solution to the problems of society cannot lie in transcending its duality but to live it. The former is what has been preached for centuries and is still being preached in a similar form, with the results that one observes. Reasoned and earnest restatements of ethical goals should always be welcomed. However, the value of such restatements should not be diluted by reintroduction of precisely those abstractions that are one cause of misunderstanding of the dynamics of society-in-conflict. The appeal of such positions makes it only more necessary to provide counterarguments in an appropriate dialectical manner. I listed several things in Bhaskar with which I agree, e.g.  3. … we are inextricably connected with our fellow human beings, the social totality and the natural cosmos in which we are embedded and of which we are a part. … To be is in fact to be related.
>  
> On the other hand, Bhaskar’s transcendental anti-realism results in apodictic statements that are unacceptable. Some examples follow:
>  
> 2. To incorporate the transcendental or supramental, the intuitive, the mental, the emotional, vastly expands our ontology. None of these can be derived in any way from physical reality (emphasis ours).
>  
> 3. Truth is in fact a more basic conception than reality, for truth, unlike reality, is not necessarily (NB: there are many hedges of this kind) implicated in a dualistic mood or structure of thought.
>  
> 4. At a more prosaic level, the aletheic fact that metals conduct electricity may consist (another hedge) in their possession of a free electron, … (NB: this is a scientific tautology. What is ‘prosaic’ about our reality?)
>  
> In our dualistic philosophy, the difficult but necessary exercise is, the "trick", if you like, is to see that all the wonderful things in human life, imagination and spirituality as well as understanding are possible solely within a natural, energetic world, in which the laws of physics hold (Principle of Naturalistic Closure). This world has, however, as part of its reality, the appearance of another world - call it noumenal or some equivalent term. 
>  
> My conclusion was and is that Bhaskar's "practical approach to ontology" is attractive but misleading and counterproductive.
>  
> As to whether computational (what, theory??) leads us to think that to be is is to be the value of a variable I leave to others to others who work with such theories to answer. Lupasco wrote that 20th Century science could be described as the search for values and invariants, with the results we know. 
>  
> Thank you.
> Joe
>  
> 
> > Le 06.06.2025 10:41 CEST, Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com> a écrit :
> >  
> >  
> > Dear Gordana, all,
> >  
> > There's been a lively back-channel discussion which is perhaps now worth opening up to the broader group.
> >  
> > The fundamental issues arising are not surprising - they are, I think, ontology, epistemology and experiment. 
> >  
> > I wonder whether, with regard to ontology, Bhaskar's Critical Realism might be useful. Bhaskar has what I think is a practical approach to ontology, which is a twist on Kant's idea of a transcendental argument - "what must be true in order to experience x". Fundamental to Bhaskar's ontological thinking is that ontology must be mechanistic in one way or another (echoing Mike's initial posting about living things and machines). Without getting into arguments about mind-independent mechanisms, the obvious point is to say that info-computationalism (deriving from Floridi), Logic in Reality, John's evolutionary gravitation theory, and Mike's multi-scale competency architectures are all mechanisms. I know there are also critiques of what a mechanism is (Lou) - but bear with me.
> >  
> > Say we posit an ontological mechanism z. This z is an answer to the transcendental question, so "z is what must be true in order to experience x". Then we have to say, "well, is it?". This is surely when we have to take z as a starting point for building a simulation of life and the universe. Then we might be in a position to say what emerges from z relates to my experience x. The epistemological problem is then one of mimesis: we are seeking to create a simulated reality and simulated experience which like the actual reality we experience. We're in the world of Golem, AI, etc (and Gombrich's "Art and Illusion")
> >  
> > This throws the spotlight back onto ontology and the assumption that there are mechanisms (mind independent or not), and this raises the fundamental question with which we began this session. Ontology is the study of being - so what is it to be? is it "to be the value of a variable"? That's what our computational inevitably lead us to think. Where does our knowledge that there is something bigger than ourselves arise from being the value of a variable? This is the key question for me - and perhaps there's an experiment to explore it.
> >  
> > Could we take any of the ontological mechanistic propositions (info-computationalism, etc) and produce a situation where emergent complex life turns on itself in the way that we see in today's world. Could we simulate the manufacture of disastrous humans? If we can't, I suggest we've not got our thinking right. 
> >  
> > It may also be the case that we need to think in a very different kind of way about how we theorise, how we act, and how we coordinate our discourse. This is the position to which I am tending. 
> >  
> > Best wishes,
> >  
> > Mark
> >  
> > 
> > On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 at 08:29, Gordana Dodig Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic at chalmers.se mailto:gordana.dodig-crnkovic at chalmers.se> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Dear Bill,
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Thank you for this deeply insightful and beautifully articulated synthesis.
> > > 
> > > Your interpretation captures the core of the info-computational view with exceptional clarity.
> > > 
> > > Your integration of embodied cognition, autopoiesis, and logic in reality into a coherent framework is truly inspiring.
> > > 
> > > I especially value your emphasis on the dynamic, self-constructing nature of living systems, where ontology and epistemology are inseparable aspects of becoming.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Regarding your question: yes, I do include valence as an essential aspect of infocomputation.
> > > 
> > > The capacity of living systems to evaluate and assign significance to internal states and external cues is fundamental for adaptive behavior.
> > > 
> > > It is through such valenced appraisals that information becomes actionable and meaningful within the self-referential dynamics of life.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Gordana
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > From: William Miller <wbmiller1 at cox.net mailto:wbmiller1 at cox.net>
> > > Date: Friday, 6 June 2025 at 03:31
> > > To: Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com mailto:johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com>, "to: Joseph Brenner" <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch mailto:joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic at mdu.se mailto:gordana.dodig-crnkovic at mdu.se>, "goernitz at em.uni-frankfurt.de mailto:goernitz at em.uni-frankfurt.de" <goernitz at em.uni-frankfurt.de mailto:goernitz at em.uni-frankfurt.de>, "Levin, Michael" <michael.levin at tufts.edu mailto:michael.levin at tufts.edu>, "Pedro C. Marijuán" <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com mailto:pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com>, Moshe Klein <gan_adam at netvision.net.il mailto:gan_adam at netvision.net.il>, Gordana Dodig Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic at chalmers.se mailto:gordana.dodig-crnkovic at chalmers.se>, JOHN TORDAY <jtorday at ucla.edu mailto:jtorday at ucla.edu>
> > > Subject: Re: [Not Fis] Gravity, Holism, and Biological Information Processing--Bill Miller's contribution: the "It" of a machine, truth and trust
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Dear Gordana, Joe, and all,
> > > 
> > > I have greatly appreciated your most recent exchange and am in full agreement with both of your perspectives. Indeed, I regard them as an integrated whole, and further, that the crux of that integration is embodied cognition epitomized within cells, which I regard as intelligent agents engaged in measured infocomputation.
> > > 
> > > Gordana highlights the interwoven relationship between ontology and epistemology within the living frame and notes that this enaction stems from 'embodied cognition'. Naturally, I couldn't agree more, which leads to our perspective (my colleagues and I) that ontology unites with epistemology within that cellular form. This is why we stress that biology is information management and, accordingly, represents a continuous natural learning system. Implicit to that frame, ontology is "constantly evolving as the agent learns" and "being and becoming are dynamically co-defined, " as Gordana so eloquently expressed. Cells are self-realizing and self-becoming through continuous self-construction, so ontology and epistemology are always reciprocal aspects of a unitary living process.
> > > 
> > > Cellular infocomputation propels these relationships, as Gordana stresses. So, having a firm grasp of what each of us means by 'infocomputation' is important, including its competencies and constraints.
> > > 
> > > I'll take the liberty of supposing that Gordana includes the valenced components of internal cellular measurement. Gordana will correct me if I've overstepped.
> > > 
> > > If both of these informational characteristics are accredited (infocomputation as amplitude and infocomputation as valenced appraisal of self-referential status, then I see a natural melding between infocomputation and Joe's brilliant work in dynamic and lemmic logic through his Logic in Reality.
> > > 
> > > That linkage centers on the constraints of information in the living frame, as imposed ambiguity, and the structural necessity of cellular autopoiesis (internal self-generation of its available, actionable, semantic information).
> > > 
> > > Joe's LIR is quite attractive, although we certainly come from different disciplines. Nonetheless, there are compelling overlaps.
> > > 
> > > LIR rejects classical binary logic, arguing that reality is not static or directly reducible to discrete true/false statements. Instead, our representation of reality, achieved via internal self-appraisal of uncertain external environmental cues, is a dynamic interplay of contradictory forces and emergent states. Of course, this living feature specifically delineates the gap between machines and the living frame.
> > > 
> > > Further, in LIR, as I understand it, its Principle of Dynamic Opposition maintains that the movement between potentials (implicates) and actuals (explicates) involves inherent contradictions that shift continuously as new states emerge. In my terms, this principle is exemplified in cells that have constructed their inner representational map of reality, measured ambiguous cues, and then determined which tools to deploy and what resources to expend to attempt to be in synchrony with that self-produced construct. However, an entailment of the 'doing' is that all aspects of that decision tree are shifting as those decisions are made, both externally within the environment which is never static, and internally through self-improvising memories that Gordana had pointedly noted.
> > > 
> > > This brings us to the 'included middle' (T-state), where oppositions co-exist in dynamic tension, leading to an emergent third state. Recently, we introduced a revision of Adrian Bejan's Constructal Law, which states that a flow system to persist in time must evolve to provide easier and greater access to its currents. This construct is meant to address thermodynamic flows in all finite physical systems and offers some explanatory insight into living system architecture. We have offered a revision that incorporates the flow of information in living systems, describing how both thermodynamic flows and information flows must accommodate each other, short of their optimized degrees of freedom, and thereby provide 'mutualizing' constraints that channel biological expression. Thus, there can be no perfection in living systems or perfection in evolution since the functional choices are always based on compromises.
> > > 
> > > This can be considered a good example of how life conforms to the 'included middle'. Notably, both flows are in consistent, reciprocated adjustment, so there is never a static state.
> > > 
> > > Cognition-Based Evolution is not just an evolutionary theory but a distinct framework about the fundamental nature of living systems and how that shapes their evolutionary trajectory. Most significantly, cells are not passive subjects of selection but are the actual agents of selection. Their infocompuational competencies determine the cell's choice of tools (including genes) and partners (synergisms). Variations arise from this cognitive selection, and these either meet environmental proscriptions or fail. Critically, that feedback is natural learning, with the environment exerting its role as a filter of precedent cellular decision-making and problem-solving.
> > > 
> > > In all such actions, cells and their aggregates are not only existing within their approximation of reality but engaged in active niche constructions to continually shape their environment, which reciprocally changes their grasp of reality through infocomputation. In this manner, emergence, inherent tension, and contradictions flow as continuous living adaptations in which both the flow of information and energy are crucial.
> > > 
> > > Circling back to Gordana's illuminating post on Jun 4., good theories, if correct, drive new avenues for empirical research. Both are necessary aspects of scientific progress.
> > > 
> > > Best regards to all,
> > > 
> > > Bill
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > On Thursday, June 5, 2025 at 05:59:24 AM MST, JOHN TORDAY <jtorday at ucla.edu mailto:jtorday at ucla.edu> wrote:
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Dear Mark, Joe, Bill, Michael, Gordana, Thomas, Pedro, Moshe, I greatly appreciate the recent comments by Gordana, Joe and Mark. I just wanted to say that I put much stock in consciousness as a manifestation of physiology based on the latter having evolved from the Cosmos through Symbiogenesis. In that vein, I have traced the cellular-molecular evolution of physiologic accommodation and exploitation of oxygen as a sequential interplay with lipids (Torday JS, Rehan VK. On the evolution of the pulmonary alveolar lipofibroblast. Exp Cell Res. 2016 Jan 15;340(2):215-9), starting at the end of the sequence with the evolution of lung surfactant as the means by which the swim bladder evolved into the lung in amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals.....that interplay of lipids and oxygen goes all the way back to Konrad Bloch's discovery of the role of cholesterol in thinning the cell membrane to facilitate oxygenation.....and beyond, me speculating regarding the role of lipid molecules in the formation of micelles as the origin of the protocell. Obviously, we'll never know how life began, except through such 'chicanery', but suffice to say that Claassen and Spooner (Claassen DE, Spooner BS. Liposome formation in microgravity. Adv Space Res. 1996;17(6-7):151-60) showed that gravity was necessary for lipid micelles to form the structural basis for life. And when Besnard et al.  (Besnard V, Wert SE, Stahlman MT, Postle AD, Xu Y, Ikegami M, Whitsett JA. Deletion of Scap in alveolar type II cells influences lung lipid homeostasis and identifies a compensatory role for pulmonary lipofibroblasts. J Biol Chem. 2009 Feb 6;284(6):4018-30) deleted the ability of the alveolar type 2 cells that make lung surfactant in alveoli to synthesize cholesterol, the mice survived that deficit in surfactant function by forming more lipofibroblasts, the cell-type that has facilitated lung surfactant production in land vertebrates, which was an exaptation (Gould and Vrba, 1982), or the re-purposing of a historic trait evolutionarily. My point is that there is a means for deconvoluting physiologic evolution by seeing how and why traits evolved under specific geo-physical and -chemical conditions, which are testable/refutable, as I have shown for the role of gravity in evolution (Torday JS. Parathyroid hormone-related protein is a gravisensor in lung and bone cell biology. Adv Space Res. 2003;32(8):1569-76), as have others. I find this preferable to simply 'deducing' evolution without experimental evidence. And all of the above leads to insight to the evolution of consciousness as the vertical integration of cell-molecular physiology (Torday JS. The holism of cosmology and consciousness. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2023 Jan;177:181-184), which is considered the most important question that faces us, particularly as AI encroaches.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Best, John
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250607/e9d40737/attachment-0001.html>