<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<big>Dear Howard and FIS colleagues,<br>
<br>
Many thanks for your exciting comments; dealing first with Koichiro's
intriguing point on action and probabilities, I think it links with the
Quantum Bayesianism we discused last year in the list (von Baeyer's FIS
New Year Lecture), and also with Karl Frinston's distributions /
representations of probabilities in cerebral areas within an
overarching entropy-minimization principle </big><big>(it is not a
physical entropy, and reminding Loet's comment, I think he was quite
right with his contentious message of 15 June!)</big><big>. Action is
but the forgotten other side the epistemic coin. Not to forget that a
motor-centered epistemology has been recently discussed too.<br>
<br>
Responding to Howard's below, rather than making further interleaving,
I will continue with a unitary text.<br>
In my view, the new informational thinking is slowly taking shape in a
variety of fields, and the reference to Witzany's work on the viruses'
social dynamics, is an excellent exponent on how carefully following
the very dynamics of life, we may arrive at similar conceptual
scenarios. My point is that biological communication (as well as human)
does not occur in a vacuum where whatever combinatory game may be
played. The life cycle of the entity is the big watcher of
communication, not just passively waiting for some stimulus passing by,
but actively deploying a series of molecular or supramolecular actions
that for instance conduce to receive the appropriate
information/communication or to engage in locomotor exploration. In
general, action stemming out from the cycle --or "propensity" to
action-- comes first, regarding the possible information gathered and
the responses to be observed later on. Each life cycle has capability
to deploy autonomously a very vast repertoire of adaptive actions /
behaviors / communications that overall should conduce to its own
advancement. So, the reliance on "stimulus-response" becomes a dubious
way of lumping together the animate and the inanimate (a mere
electromagnetic relay would also provide S-R behavior), leaving aside
the most precious stuff of life: its informational organization in an
autonomous, self-propelled life-cycle. It is a life-cycle that besides,
has to take place in a highly complex and challenging ecological niche
and within a tricky social environment. To reiterate the main point:
the living is not S-R mechanistic, is "informational". <br>
<br>
And what is information? I agree with Howard's "relative" approach to
information. I think that, together with Marcin, we must organize a
future discussion-session in the list to analyze this most integrative
stance. I think that this view now is mature enough to be publicly
discussed (and has already appeared in the literature</big><big>
occasionally</big><big>). My personal contention is that a similar
relative conceptualization may be extended to other "informational
entities" (viruses, cells, organisms, brains, social groups and
institutions, societies at large...) that also communicate in order to
advance their self-production processes. Precisely in economy, we may
understand that prices emerge as the information which connects and
integrates the ACTIONS of producers and consumers allowing the
self-organization of the whole. Obviously, the market information is
exchanged in order to improve the condition of the individuals, and in
aggregate to advance their own life cycles. Similarly, in physiological
"markets" between cells, molecular signals --really an information
flow-- would also be exchanged to coordinate the actions emerging from
the ongoing life-cycles. <br>
<br>
If we consider that biological communication, and in general the
communication of "informational entities" is tied to the maintenance
and advancement of their self-production processes, the discussion of
meaning follows quite naturally. Meaning becomes the impact of the
information received upon the self-production process itself. In
bio-molecular terms, meaning may be exactly enacted through a vastly
used procedure, microarray experiments. By knocking down a particular
receptor,or continuously keeping it "on", we see the "meaning" effects
that the specific signaling condition has on gene expression, on the
whole cellular self-production. Meaningful communication begets
relevant self-production changes. Then, lets generalize that
informational entities are those that systematically intertwine the
information (communication) flows and the energy (self-production)
flows. The information derived from communication widely circulates and
gets mixed with the inner self-production processes, adaptively
changing the ongoing operations that constitute the "metabolic life" of
the entity. That's the existential fate of all informational entities:
they are adaptive, structurally always in the making, and in the
dismantling. <br>
<br>
And the "dismantling" connects very nicely with the conditions that
Howard establishes for the functioning of a "collective learning
machine", a global brain. The quintet of essential conditions includes:
conformity enforcers, diversity generators, inner-judges, resource
shifters, and intergroup tournaments (herein I am responding to another
off-line exchange). Depending on the different kinds of informational
entities, those conditions appear in some way or in another. For my
taste, they could also be expressed in less Darwinian </big><big>a </big><big><big><small>way,
also with emphasis in the cooperative dynamics and the associate
behavioral propensities--bonding, enjoyment, love, sociotype making...
which I think is more balanced and realistic. In any case, for our
times, it is very important to openly establish and discuss --from new
premises, looking for new principles-- the biological and social
underpinning of informational phenomena at large. Whether the
inanimate may be accommodated or not within this new way of thinking,
I think it can be done. Time will tell.<br>
<br>
Best--Pedro</small><br>
<br>
</big></big><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com">HowlBloom@aol.com</a> wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid86241.186776b4.42b35a1e@aol.com" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 11.00.9600.17842">
<font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2">
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<div>
<div>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2">In a message dated 6/17/2015 8:30:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight
Time, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a> writes:</font></div>
<blockquote style="padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 10px;">
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2">Dear
Steven and FIS Colleagues,<br>
<br>
Your message has arrived to the list perfectly: fears are unjustified. <br>
There is no censorship in this list --and never will be any (well, as <br>
the movie tells "never say never again"!). Anyhow, I would
dis-dramatize <br>
the discussion. The Vienna conference has been very exciting and full
of <br>
oral discussions that somehow continue now. Quite many of those good <br>
ideas have been rediscussed in the exchanges of these days. However,
for <br>
my taste, the essential connection between information and life has not
<br>
properly surfaced yet.</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"
face="Verdana">hb. have you seen Guenther Witzak's When Competing
Viruses Unify or my book The God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos
Creates? both have clues to the relationship between information and
life. mere clues. but a good start.</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2"> The
explosion of complexity in the living and the <br>
explosion of complexity in modern societies is clearly depending on <br>
information and communication flows (or whatever we may denominate). <br>
Comparatively with the complexity of merely physical systems, there is <br>
no point about that. Apart from following the physics, most of the <br>
alternative approaches so far discussed go for the discursive, <br>
conceptual domain as the place where information should be <br>
ascertained... What if information belongs to action,</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"
face="Verdana">hb: good question. what is the relationship between
information and action? what is the relationship between stimulus and
response? another topic in The God Problem.</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2"> to
the adaptive <br>
changes arranged by the living and socioeconomic agents, to the <br>
tentative advancement of their life cycles, to the difficult
achievement <br>
of their fitness in an ever changing environment as communicating <br>
members of bigger entities and societies... then we are leaving that <br>
action track of life just as a fragmented scenario of multiple <br>
specialized points of view--or tying it unpropery. As Goethe put in <br>
Faust "At the beginning was the deed" Helas not the Verb!<br>
<br>
In Vienna I agreed with Marcin's pragmatic approach to the "liquidity" <br>
of information. Maybe it is too long to argue, and sure he can do
better <br>
than me. But getting to terms with the factic undefinability of the
term <br>
may help quite a bit to the practice of information science research by
<br>
people with empirical and naturalistic orientation. </font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"
face="Verdana">hb: from The God Problem: "<span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; line-height: 200%;">information
is anything that a receiver can decode.<span style=""> </span>Information
is anything a receiver can translate.<span style=""> </span>Information
is anything that a reciever can understand.<span style=""> </span>Information
is in the eyes of the beholder.</span>" how do we know when
information has hit home? stimulus and response. action. the verb.</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2">One
should not feel <br>
forced to define a fundamental concept (on a pair with "time" and <br>
"space"--basic forms of information indeed) </font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"
face="Verdana">hb: this is intriguing. how do you interpret time and
space as information? they do tell particles where to go. and
particles respond by moving. is that it?</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2">plus
a cohort of other <br>
"impossible" related terms (meaning, knowledge, intelligence)</font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font
style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);">hb: from the god problem
re the meaning of meaning: "<span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">If meaning
is anything that a receiver can understand, if meaning is anything that
an entity can interpret, if meaning is in the eye of the beholder, then
how do you know when a thing or a person “understands” something?
Follow the B.F. Skinner rule.<span style=""> </span>Watch his or her
behavior.<span style=""> </span>Watch for the signs of stimulus and
response.<span style=""> </span>Watch to<span style=""> </span>see
if the receiver does something in response to the stimulus.<span
style=""> </span>Watch to see if the receiver moves.<span style="">
</span>Quarks exchange meaning with stimulus and response.<span
style=""> </span>So do gas whisps competing to swallow each other.<span
style=""> </span>And so do would-be planets using their gravity to
snag and cannibalize comets and space debris.<span style=""> </span>How
do we know the receivers get the meaning?<span style=""> </span>All
of them respond to the signals they receive.<span style=""> </span>They
move.<span style=""> </span>They move toward each other."</span></font></font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font
style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span></font></font> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font
style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">one more
word. from the work of Valerius Geist, author of Life Strategies. all
communication comes down to two elements: attraction cues and repulsion
cues.</span></font></font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Verdana" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span></font> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2"> in
order <br>
to practice good info science research. Acknowledging that, could be a <br>
first step to achieve a consensus on some basic principles of <br>
information science that would allow the disciplinary construction and <br>
all the multiple diversity within. It will take time and patience. So, <br>
our "market of conceptual exchange" should continue unabated. <br>
Particularly, continuing the debate on the 4 th Great Domain of Science
<br>
can help us to have a big picture where our more immediate, particular <br>
goals might one day dovetail.</font></font></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 10px;">
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);" face="Verdana">hb: i'm a
newcomer to these discussions. what is the fourth great domain of
science?</font></font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"> </font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0"
size="2"><font style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Verdana">with warmth and oomph--howard</font></font></font></div>
<font family="SANSSERIF" ptsize="10" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></font></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</font></blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/">http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/</a>
-------------------------------------------------
</pre>
</body>
</html>