[Fis] What are the most important 20% of Informatics?

Fri Jun 27 17:33:00 CEST 2025

Dear Joe, thank you for the vote of confidence, if I may.....I'll reply to
you in *[brackets]*

*"*I entirely agree with this important note. I also have tried to urge a
closer look at both the differences and interactions between the ontology
and epistemology of the real processes we now instantiate at a non-quantum
macroscopic level.

*[With regard to the ontology and epistemology, I have now traced 'life'
back to Fred Hoyle's Stellar Nucleosynthesis of stars and the elements as
their by-products in the exact order of their atomic masses as the 'logic'
of the Cosmos. And Symbiogenesis, or the assimilation of elements to form
homeostatic physiology, acts to embody that 'logic' as consciousness. And
the process of cell formation from lipid molecules to form micelles, as
well as Symbiogenesis are under the auspices of gravity (experimentally),
so the ontology and epistemology are internally consistent]*

As suggested, to simply adumbrate something as "matter-energy-information"
or "3-dimensional" accomplishes nothing. The result is just as subjective
as the categories of Peirce unless the details of their mutual interaction
are spelled out. Also incomplete is the statement that  matter and energy
of ways of being without showing how they are also ways of becoming
-changing and effecting change.

*[Agree. We are marinating in Darwinism, which is unsubstantiated in terms
of 'gain and loss of function' experiments. Alternatively, epigenetic
inheritance as a consequence of dyshomeostasis, the cells involved
producing Radical Oxygen Species known to cause genetic mutations and
duplications would explain 'internal selection' for a return to homeostasis
in order to 'fit' with the changed environment...i.e. evolution as serial
homeostases]*

The phrase an element like sodium encodes the justification for going back,
if not to the Big Bang, to the entanglement of ions with their, say,
aqueous environment, hydration spheres and so on that define their
*potential *for their behavior and then on up. I have suggested that the
transition state in a chemical reaction is the most realistic model
possible for the "included middle" in every real process from biological to
cognitive structure and function.

*[If I understand your statement, yes, the phase transitions are
key....starting with the micelle, going through a 'quantum leap' from
individual lipid molecules to semi-permeable membrane as the basis for the
cell accommodating both classical and quantum mechanics]*

Unless the term informatics can include this hard science, one may, as
Krassimir has, question its significance."

*[I am of the opinion that once you begin with 'energy' as the initiation
of life, starting with the Big Bang, information becomes sufficient, but
not necessary. Jack Szostak, the Nobelist 'origin of life' scientist has
shown that lipids can synthesize DNA, but DNA cannot synthesize lipids, for
example. If you trace the organism from zygote to embryo to offspring to
organism, it's a series of high energy phosphate transfers, not information
that mediates that process....we evolve from zygote to zygote, not adult to
adult]*

OK Joe, so you and I agree.....now what? I am of the opinion that if we
were to recognize the power of epigenetic inheritance, and systematically
link the institutions of society together synergistically it would result
in demonstrably more effective quality of life and human evolution.]

Best, John

John S. Torday
Professor of Pediatrics
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Evolutionary Medicine
UCLA

*Fellow, The European Academy of Science and Arts*

On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 10:06 AM <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> wrote:

> Dear John,
>
> I entirely agree with this important note. I also have tried to urge a
> closer look at both the differences and interactions between the ontology
> and epistemology of the real processes we now instantiate at a non-quantum
> macroscopic level.
>
>
> As suggested, to simply adumbrate something as "matter-energy-information"
> or "3-dimensional" accomplishes nothing. The result is just as subjective
> as the categories of Peirce unless the details of their mutual interaction
> are spelled out. Also incomplete is the statement that  matter and energy
> of ways of being without showing how they are also ways of becoming
> -changing and effecting change.
>
> The phrase an element like sodium encodes the justification for going
> back, if not to the Big Bang, to the entanglement of ions with their, say,
> aqueous environment, hydration spheres and so on that define their
> *potential *for their behavior and then on up. I have suggested that the
> transition state in a chemical reaction is the most realistic model
> possible for the "included middle" in every real process from biological to
> cognitive structure and function.
>
> Unless the term informatics can include this hard science, one may, as
> Krassimir has, question its significance.
>
> Criticisms and corrections welcome.
>
> Best,
> Joe
>
>
>
> Le 23.06.2025 13:51 CEST, JOHN TORDAY <jtorday at ucla.edu> a écrit :
>
>
> Dear Mark, Joe and fis, in the context of ontology, I would like to pitch
> the idea that life evolved from non-life, Symbiogenesis, the mechanism by
> which existential threats to homeostatic control of energy have been
> assimilated in the process of evolution. That process can be traced all the
> way back to the proto-cell appropriating elements like sodium, chlorine,
> potassium, etc, etc to form physiologic structure and function (Torday
> JS. Consciousness, embodied Quantum Entanglement. Prog Biophys Mol Biol.
> 2023 Jan;177:125-128). And btw, all of the elements were the by-products
> of Stellar Nucleosynthesis, the formation of stars.....I am of the opinion
> that to really understand ontology and epistemology you must go all the way
> back to the Big Bang and its products or the ontology and epistemology will
> be mismatched.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> John S. Torday
> Professor
> UCLA
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 7:12 AM <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
> Dear Mark and All,
>
> To facilitate the discussion, two of the ontologists Mark may have in mind
> are D. Jacquette. *Ontology*. Montreal: 2008 and E.J. Lowe. *A
> Four-Category Ontology.* Oxford: 2006.
>
> The sub-title of the second reference may help define the problem, it is: *The
> Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. *Whatever the Foundations of
> Information Science are, I submit that they are physical and not
> metaphysical and their ontology is also.
>
> Best wishes,
> Joe
>
> Le 21.06.2025 21:43 CEST, Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>
> Joe, I reckon you and I could set up a clinic to treat those who believe
> they are ontologists!
>
> But then I thought that there are some on this list who might object to
> this might wish to set up their own clinics to treat us...
>
> I don't think it matters providing the therapy is gentle and doesn't
> involve berating people for holding to their ideas!
>
> Best wishes
>
> Mark
>
> 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!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7JPy3dU2Q$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QFHLkfyExt72M5tbiIsAh5vkotJleTlCx5zaRIDc-HkCMFdTG5Z219WQYELMlTDF1kdxc84Fr1GgFN9v0utSe6o$>
>
> On Sat, 21 Jun 2025, 17:14 , <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
> Dear Jason,
>
> The best steering can be useless if 1) you don't know your destination or
> 2) you are going nowhere. I appreciate your attempt at a new synthesis but
> cannot help finding it too Promethean, too Hegelian, in a word too
> Confucian, if I may. I miss the perspective provided by Chuang Tzü. Thus, I
> would like to be sure that your approach can include, because it belongs in
> science, the concept of "The Great Way that Leads Nowhere".
>
> I did not appreciate the reference to Lego, which is a "game" with inert
> building blocks. I did welcome the inclusion of systemics, but I hope it is
> a systemics in the broad sense of Gianfranco Minati. Can we include in your
> synthesis things that are neither systems nor non-systems?
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> I thus "abound" in your constructive critique with just one
> question/addition. Is it not desirable,, especially here, to add an
> ontological "therapy" to an epistemological one?
>
> I do not believe these questions are only philosophical or "abstract". AI
> now codifies low-dimensional thinking as the norm. SCI may be a good
> "vehicle" in the Buddhist sense, or "therapy" in Mark's sense, to get
> beyond it, but one must be careful not to reproduce errors due to the use
> of standard terms.
>
> Best wishes,
> Joseph
>
> Le 21.06.2025 11:44 CEST, Mark Johnson <johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>
> Hi Jason
>
> I think with regard to cybernetics, the essential point is what the word
> means. It is about steering, and steering is different from "knowing" or
> even "being". Mostly education deals with "knowing" - and I think even the
> various attempts to distil cybernetics into "key facts" misses the essence
> of what it is about.
>
> We might long for an institutional home for Cybernetics, with a codified
> curriculum, textbooks, etc. But forget it. Not only do institutions not get
> it, but the desire for this will destroy the essence of what steering is
> about.
>
> Mary Catherine Bateson put it most eloquently here:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://youtu.be/nXQraugWbjQ?feature=shared__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7JtfBSUlY$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://youtu.be/nXQraugWbjQ?feature=shared__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S0yCJ3xMWdUqOg7BcoG3X5rMq_bnTTNwUD5f2LBinthg8jQhBYeuCxM6LaHY-a84tRNl6WSjEe23sOGDk9yTESc$>
>  (were you there? I wasn't unfortunately...)
>
> Universities do not have departments of epistemological therapy. That's
> what cybernetic way of thinking offers.
>
> Every discipline, every field of scientific and social inquiry needs
> epistemological therapy. There is no textbook whereby this can be achieved,
> nor can there be one. It can only be achieved through the skilful
> intervention of people who think differently and demonstrate the
> possibility of thinking differently by the way they are and the way they
> engage with others.
>
> So I am generally sceptical about distilling cybernetics - it's
> antithetical to what cybernetics is. For those who "think cybernetically",
> go and *be cybernetic* and ruffle feathers in politics, art, biology,
> education, psychology, physics, maths, health, engineering, etc. There's
> certainly no career in it, but it may be the best that we can do.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Mark
>
> Dr. Mark William Johnson
> Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health
> University of Manchester
>
> Department of Science Education
> University of Copenhagen
>
> Department of Eye and Vision Science (honorary)
> University of Liverpool
> Phone: 07786 064505
> Email: johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com
> Blog: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7JPy3dU2Q$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S0yCJ3xMWdUqOg7BcoG3X5rMq_bnTTNwUD5f2LBinthg8jQhBYeuCxM6LaHY-a84tRNl6WSjEe23sOGDxgeyN8U$>
>
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2025, 01:48 Jason Hu, <jasonthegoodman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear FIS colleagues:
>
> If your whole book of Informatics has 100 pages, what content would be the
> most important 20 pages (per 20:80 Law)? I'm asking this question to all of
> you since the Club of Remy is organizing a discussion to integrate
> Systemics-Cyberentics-Informatics sister fields into a unified trinity
> curriculum for the younger generation. Here is the original Call for
> Discussants. I wish some of you would be kind enough to provide your
> insights to answer the two questions raised in this call. You are also more
> than welcome to consider attending these discussions in our Zoom meetings
> later.  Best regards - Jason
>
> *Title:  It is time to wrap up cybernetics – and distill 20% of it for a
> new curriculum *
> *Author: Jason Hu*
> *Outline:*
>
> Two great cyberneticians in our Club of Remy have Rest-In-Peace:  Our
> beloved Professor Klaus Krippendorff and Professor Loet Leydesdorff. Our
> YouTube channel now has their “Playlist” of their contributions to our
> club.  A number of noted cyberneticians have reduced participation in the
> recent two years; the reasons might be aging, decline of health, and/or
> exhaustion of new insights from cybernetics per se. One of the used-to-be
> large cybernetics discussion forums, CYBCOM, initialized by me and Stuart
> Umpleby as a Listserv on an IBM mainframe more than 30 years ago, now has
> only one active user posting on it (not me).
>
> Meanwhile, huge tides in R&D and applications, initiated in 1943 by the
> McCulloch-Pitts, are currently changing our world in a profound way. Some
> of my colleagues might not like it, since these new waves discarded the
> term “cybernetics” but use the word “AI,” even though they are deeply
> related, if not identical.
>
> After studying (and working/practicing) in the field named “cybernetics”
> since 1979, through many mentors/advisors in those 47 years, I think it is
> time now that we wrap up what we call “cybernetics” and start a new field
> of human knowledge, SCI.” In a narrow definition, SCI stands for
> Systemics-Cybernetics-Informatics trinity. In a broader definition, it
> should also include and integrate Catastrophe Theory, Dissipative Theory,
> Synergetics, Chaos Theory, Complexity Science, and Evolution Theory (alas,
> a total of 9 names). All these names mentioned here have inner connections,
> but their ideas/models/insights are spread in many different books and
> papers that are severely siloed and confusing to young learners.
>
> The Oxford Project, which started last September at the WOSC conference,
> is an effort to develop a “standard model” of SCI for a new generation of
> learners, with the assistance of currently available AI tools. This Call of
> Discussants to all members of CoR asking if you are with me to go forward
> this transition from “only cybernetics” to “SCI,” Yes or No?
>
> If yes, here are two questions to be discussed in this session: 1-What are
> the 20%  most important knowledge pieces (per 20:80 law) from “cybernetics”
> that we need to present in the SCI curriculum? 2- What will be our feasible
> approach to use current AI tools to make this new SCI curriculum/online
> course?
>
> I shall post question #1 to “Systemics” colleagues (ISSS) and
> “Informatics” colleagues (FIS) to invite them into this Lego game (of
> redefining a new field of knowledge SCI in the format of an entry-level
> curriculum). ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and Perplexity will be invited too.
>
> If you have some ideas about these two questions, please sign up for a
> good discussion.
>
> ------------------------------------
> Jason Jixuan Hu, Ph.D.
> Independent Research Scholar
> Organizer: Club of REMY:  https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.clubofremy.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7JQ1Ryt-E$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.clubofremy.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Q8jjJUy0YjeO0fqBBSUwi-_4zhvTAltAVs4SpOm5So10toInnuB90Te61YawEBftGBR52lL6thub6Bbr20yHmEqWmIjo$>
>
> General Partner: WINTOP Group: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.wintopgroup.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7Jth3DDeY$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.wintopgroup.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Q8jjJUy0YjeO0fqBBSUwi-_4zhvTAltAVs4SpOm5So10toInnuB90Te61YawEBftGBR52lL6thub6Bbr20yHmO5v9Hsn$>
>
> Introduction: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://drjasonhu.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7JHKTx08w$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://drjasonhu.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Q8jjJUy0YjeO0fqBBSUwi-_4zhvTAltAVs4SpOm5So10toInnuB90Te61YawEBftGBR52lL6thub6Bbr20yHmLDxJg4F$>
> Wiki Page: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tinyurl.com/JJH008__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7J0YAoM1s$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tinyurl.com/JJH008__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Q8jjJUy0YjeO0fqBBSUwi-_4zhvTAltAVs4SpOm5So10toInnuB90Te61YawEBftGBR52lL6thub6Bbr20yHmK38oYbt$>
>
> Video: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tinyurl.com/JJHsprach__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VVHbuK5G3x7tL70W2Q-HrlDabwOUX5QtFtNDtFrlAMqfmPiGQ1cn51ZXqzB5V0uGlj_jmIvpeN7J0_srDtQ$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tinyurl.com/JJHsprach__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Q8jjJUy0YjeO0fqBBSUwi-_4zhvTAltAVs4SpOm5So10toInnuB90Te61YawEBftGBR52lL6thub6Bbr20yHmCo1frEg$>
> office: jjh at wintopgroup.com
> mobile: jasonthegoodman at gmail.com
> ---------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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 
> ----------
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250627/9908daf0/attachment-0001.html>