<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6002.19567" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Dear Pedro,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Most of us would agree that standard Western science does not give a
complete answer to questions about life and mind. As we try to seek better
foundations in general and for information science in particular, we may be able
to benefit from knowledge resources which have not been fully exploited, those
of the 'Past' and those of the ‘East’. I myself have written a paper suggesting
that a metalogical rejunction is possible in which logic recovers its original
status as inclusive of all other disciplines. As Brian Josephson writes in the
Abstract of one of his lectures, “Eastern mystics may have relevance to
scientific understanding.” Fritjof Capra explored such parallels in his
important 1967 book <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">The Tao of
Physics.</I><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>However, many
interpretations of what mysticism is are possible.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>There is a further major <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">caveat
</I>to keep in mind: there are different ways of understanding “what is missing”
in science (see Terence Deacon’s discussion of information) and what kind of
additions could be made. On the one hand, we may legitimately associate quantum
fluctuations with Indian (not Eastern) ideas of things continuously moving in
and out of existence. On the other, as we have discussed in connection with
Conrad’s ‘fluctuons’ at least once in the FIS Group, it may NOT be correct to
say that such fluctuations are or can carry meaningful
information.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Recent postings to the FIS list have been made by people associated with
a project embedded in a major university (<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City
w:st="on">Cambridge</st1:City>, <st1:country-region
w:st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place>), the “Matter-Mind Unification
Project”, now the “Theory of Condensed Matter Group” which Josephson has
directed. This effort has sought and still seeks to incorporate doubtful,
self-confirming forms of Western thought and activity. <SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Personally, I do not wish to be associated with the Circular Theory of
Ilexa Yardley, in which “the core dynamic is the conservation of a circle”,
which is a misunderstanding of dynamics. I do not wish to accept nature as
controlled by some “Master Algorithm”, any more than I do Peircean
Thirdness. I do not wish to be associated with paranormal phenomena, cold fusion
and observer created reality, all of which are part of Josephson’s
project.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>A characteristic of this thought is its dogmatism of completeness, a
theory of everything, in which things are linked by a “subtler dimension which
we have identified with the Platonic realm” (Yardley). One might argue that the
Tao is also a theory of everything that also sees things linked in a way
different from that of, say, chemical bonds. The major difference is that
understanding the Tao does not require abrogating science in order to replace it
by a self-serving ideology. Deacon has characterized the ‘homunculi’ and
‘golems’, disguised as physical principles, that interfere with thought;
‘wishful thinking’ is the most charitable term that can be applied.
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Other FIS members may find these ideas harmless, perhaps even amusing. I
consider them perversions of thought by people with an agenda of control. The
one positive result of these postings has been to cause me to re-examine the
assumptions in the logic of the included middle of Stéphane Lupasco. This as
some of you know is the basis of my ‘Logic in Reality’ and its Principle of
Dynamic Opposition (critical formulation by Lupasco <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">ca. </I>1951). I conclude that no new and
doubtful physical concepts need to be introduced to address the essential
aspects of life, mind and information. That information has ‘dual aspects’ has
been more or less explicit in everything I have tried to write in the last eight
years. But these concepts are not simple; one cannot use the principles of
quantum mechanics directly. Hence I do not expect to find a large audience
nor, to be frank, a large market. I simply hope they may deserve some more
discussion on the FIS list.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Best wishes,<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=2> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=2>Joseph <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>