<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=gb2312">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px;">
<div>
<div><font face="Avenir">Hello Terry, Sung, FIS colleagues</font></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><font face="Calibri,monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">There is a notion of ¡°body language¡±.</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">Perhaps it might be possible to develop a general theory of language that can take into account bacteria and dogs (according to Nature http://www.nature.com/news/dogs-can-tell-when-praise-is-sincere-1.20514) as well as plants https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2634130/
& https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688289/ cognitive agents with different levels of cognition which communicate and process information in order to survive. </font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">One may build a theory of communication of information by just paying attention to what has been sent with respect to the cognitive structures of a sender and what has been received with respect to the cognitive structure of a receiver.
Here cognitive means embodied and should include all sensors, actuators, memory and information processing mechanisms. As in biology thre are different kinds of organisms there are also different kinds of ¡°languages¡±. There are small languages communicated
in relatively simple ways between simple agents (like cells) and big languages used by complex agents like humans.</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">Why not?</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">Best wishes,</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir">Gordana</font></div>
<div><font face="Avenir"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, monospace; font-size: 12px;"><br>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, monospace; font-size: 12px;"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, monospace; font-size: 12px;">On 2018-02-13, 06:33, "Fis on behalf of Terrence W. DEACON" <<a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</a> on behalf of
<a href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu">deacon@berkeley.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, monospace; font-size: 12px;"><br>
</div>
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="font-family: Calibri, monospace; font-size: 12px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 5px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 5px;">
<div>To claim that:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"without a language, no communication would be possible"</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>one must be using the term "language" in a highly metaphoric sense.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is scent marking a language?</div>
<div>Music?</div>
<div>Sexual displays, like a peacock's tail?</div>
<div>How about a smile or frown?</div>
<div>Is the pattern of colors of a flower that attracts bees a language?</div>
<div>Was the evolution of language in humans just more of the same, not</div>
<div>something distinct from a dog's bark?</div>
<div>When a person is depressed, their way of walking often communicates</div>
<div>this fact to others; so is this slight modification of posture part of</div>
<div>a language?</div>
<div>If I get the hiccups after eating is this part of a language that</div>
<div>communicates my indigestion?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is this usage of the term 'language' simply referring to the necessity</div>
<div>of a shared medium of communication? Is it possible to develop a</div>
<div>general theory of information by simply failing to make distinctions?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>¡ª Terry</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 2/12/18, Sungchul Ji <<a href="mailto:sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu">sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;">
<div>Hi FISers,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(1) I think language and communication cannot be separated, since without a</div>
<div>language, no communication would be possible (see Figure 1).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> f</div>
<div> g</div>
<div> Sender -------> Message</div>
<div>--------> Receiver</div>
<div> |</div>
<div> ^</div>
<div> |</div>
<div> |</div>
<div> |</div>
<div> |</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>|_____________________________|</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> h</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>¡°Language and communication are both irreducibly triadic; i.e., the three</div>
<div>nodes and three edges are essential for communication, given a language or</div>
<div>code understood by both the sender and receiver.¡± f = encoding; g =</div>
<div>decoding; h = information flow.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Figure 1. A diagrammatic representation of the irreducibly triadic nature</div>
<div>of communication and language.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(2) I think it may be justified and useful to distinguish between</div>
<div>anthropomorphic language metaphor (ALM) and non-athropomorphic language</div>
<div>metaphor (NLM). I agree with many of the members of this list that we</div>
<div>should not apply ALM to biology uncritically, since such an approch to</div>
<div>biology may lead to unjustifiable anthropomorphisms.</div>
<div>(<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homunculus">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homunculus</a>) and the anthropocentric theory of</div>
<div>creatiion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(3) Table 1 below may represent one possible example of NLM. Although the</div>
<div>linguistic terms such as letters, words, sentences, etc. are used in this</div>
<div>table, they are matrially/ontologically different from their molecular</div>
<div>coutner parts; e.g., letters are different from nucleotides, protein</div>
<div>domians , etc.,and words are different from genes, proteins, etc., but</div>
<div>there are unmistakable common formal features among them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Table 1. The formal and material aspects of the cell language (Cellese).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>\ Material Aspect</div>
<div> \ (Function)</div>
<div> \</div>
<div> \</div>
<div> \</div>
<div> \</div>
<div> \</div>
<div>Formal Aspect \</div>
<div> (Function) \</div>
<div> \</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>DNA Language</div>
<div>(DNese;</div>
<div>Information transmission in time)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RNA Language</div>
<div>(RNese;</div>
<div>Information transmission in space, from DNA to proteins)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Protein Language</div>
<div>(Proteinese;</div>
<div>Energy transduction</div>
<div>from chemical to mechanical; i.e., conformon production)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chemical Language</div>
<div>(Moleculese;</div>
<div>Source of free energy)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Letters*</div>
<div>(To build)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4n nucleotides</div>
<div>n = 1, 2, 3, 4, . . .</div>
<div>Exons (?)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Protein domains</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Partial chemical reactions</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Words</div>
<div>(To denote)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Genes</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Proteins</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Full chemical reactions</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sentences</div>
<div>(To decide)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>cis-Genes (?)**</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Metabolic pathways</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chemical gradients</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Texts</div>
<div>(To reason/compute)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>trans-Genes (?)**</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>¡®Hypermetabolic pathways¡¯</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chemical waves (?)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>*I recently proposed that there are n (with n = 1 ~103?) genetic alphabets,</div>
<div>each containing 4^n letters and each letter in turn consisting of n</div>
<div>nucleotides. In this view, the 64 codons are the so-called 3rd-order</div>
<div>letters , not words as widely assumed.</div>
<div>**cis-Genes are here defined as those genes covalently linked to each other</div>
<div>and hence being in the same chromosome, whereas trans-genes are defined as</div>
<div>those genes that are located in different chromos</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(4) The terms, DNese, RNese, and proteinese were coined by a young American</div>
<div>biochemist from Mexico City whom I met at the International Workshop on the</div>
<div>Linguistics of Biology and the Biology of Language held in Cuernavaca,</div>
<div>Mexico, in 1998, where I had presented the cell language ('cellese') theory,</div>
<div>prior to the young biochemist¡¯s lecture which followed mine the next day.</div>
<div>In his lecture, he surprised me by announcing these neologisms, which I did</div>
<div>not quite know how to justify. But it took almost 20 years for me to</div>
<div>finally realize the utility of these terms for entirely different reasons, I</div>
<div>am sure, from those of the young biochemist from Mexico City. I am</div>
<div>responsible for the coinage of cellese and chemicalese in Table 1.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(5) If Table 1 is right, the cellese and its sub-languages, DNese, RNese,</div>
<div>proteinese and chemiclaese, are complemetary unions of form and matter.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you have any questions or comments, pleae let me know.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>All the best.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sung</div>
<div>(My time is out. I am signing out in a hurry.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>________________________________</div>
<div>From: Fis <<a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</a>> on behalf of Xueshan Yan</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn">yxs@pku.edu.cn</a>></div>
<div>Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 6:31 AM</div>
<div>To: FIS Group</div>
<div>Cc: 'Jose Javier Blanco Rivero'</div>
<div>Subject: Re: [Fis] The unification of the theories of information based on</div>
<div>the cateogry theory</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dear Javier and Dear Stan,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Javier:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. I very much agree with you as follows:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>¡°I think that only signals can be transmitted, not information. Information</div>
<div>can only be gained by an observer (a self-referential system) that draws a</div>
<div>distinction.¡±</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A Chinese scholar Dongsheng Miao¡¯s argument is: There is no information can</div>
<div>exists without carrier, i.e. No naked can exists.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think both of you two are expressing a principle of information science.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. According to Linguistics, the relationship between language and</div>
<div>communication is:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Language is a tool of communication about information.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Of course, this is only limited to the human atmosphere. So I think that all</div>
<div>(Human) Semiotics ((Human) Linguistics), (Human) Communication Study should</div>
<div>be the subdisciplines of Human Informatics.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>==========================================================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dear Xueshan,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for sharing your interesting remarks and references. I think no one</div>
<div>really wants to deny the crucial role the language metaphor has played in</div>
<div>the thinking of communication and information models. But I believe the</div>
<div>crucial point is to distinguish between language and communication. Language</div>
<div>is for us humans the main communication medium, though not the only one. We</div>
<div>tend to describe other communication media in society and nature by mapping</div>
<div>the language-like characteristics they have. This has been useful and</div>
<div>sucessful so far. But pushing the language metaphor too far is showing its</div>
<div>analytical limits. I think we need to think of a transdisciplinary theory of</div>
<div>communication media. On the other hand, I agree with you that we need to</div>
<div>check the uses of the concepts of signal and information. I think that only</div>
<div>signals can be transmitted, not information. Information can only be gained</div>
<div>by an observer (a self-referential system) that draws a distinction.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Javier</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>==============================================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Stan:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>According to Peirce, language is only one of the systematic signs. Here we</div>
<div>consider sign, signal, symbol as the same thing. So, more precisely in my</div>
<div>opinion:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>{signal {information}}, or {substrate {signal {information}}}</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But not</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>{language {signal {information}}}</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you remember, in our previous discussions, I much appreciate the</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The hierarchy idea is very important to our study which is initially</div>
<div>introduced by Pedro, Nikhil and you.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>===============================================================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Xueshan -- I think one can condense some of your insights hierarchically,</div>
<div>as:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In a system having language, information seemingly may be obtained in other</div>
<div>ways as well. It would be a conceptually broader category. Thus (using the</div>
<div>compositional hierarchy):</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> [information [language [signal]]]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Meaning that, when a system has language, all information will be understood</div>
<div>or construed by way of linguistic constructs.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(Here I am using ¡®signal¡¯ as being more specific than Peirce¡¯s ¡®sign¡¯,</div>
<div>where:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> [sign [information [...]]] )</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Then, more dynamically (using the subsumptive hierarchy):</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> {language {signal {information}}}</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Information in a languaged system is derived by way linguistic formations,</div>
<div>so that, even though it is an extremely broad category, information</div>
<div>(informing) only emerges by way of linguistically informed transformations.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>STAN</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes to all,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Xueshan</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>===============================================================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>El feb 10, 2018 5:23 AM, "Xueshan Yan"</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn">yxs@pku.edu.cn</a><<a href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn>">mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn></a>> escribi¨®:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dear Colleagues,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have read the article "The languages of bacteria" which Gordana</div>
<div>recommended, and has gained a lot of inspiration from it. In combination</div>
<div>with Sung's comparative linguistics exploration on cell language and human</div>
<div>language, I have the following learning feelings to share with everyone:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In this article, the author recognized that bacteria have evolved multiple</div>
<div>languages for communicating within and between species. Intra- and</div>
<div>interspecies cell-cell communication allows bacteria to coordinate various</div>
<div>biological activities in order to behave like multicellular organisms. Such</div>
<div>as AI-2, it is a general language that bacteria use for intergenera</div>
<div>signaling.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I found an interesting phenomenon in this paper: the author use the concept</div>
<div>information 3 times but the concept signal (signal or signaling) 55 times,</div>
<div>so we have to review the history and application of ¡°information¡± and</div>
<div>¡°signal¡± in biology and biochemistry, it is helpful for us to understand the</div>
<div>relationship between language, signal, and information.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The origin of the concept of signal (main the signal transduction) can be</div>
<div>traced back to the end of the 1970s. But until 1980, biochemist and</div>
<div>endocrinologist Martin Rodbell published an article titled: ¡°The Role of</div>
<div>Hormone Receptors and GTP-Regulatory Proteins in Membrane Transduction" in</div>
<div>Nature, in this paper he used the "signal transduction" first time. Since</div>
<div>then, the research on signal transduction is popular in biology and</div>
<div>biochemistry.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As for any information transmission system, if we pay more attention to its</div>
<div>transmission carrier instead of its transmission content, we are used to</div>
<div>employing "signal transmission" instead of "signal transduction". From the</div>
<div>tradition of the early use of information concept, the signal transduction</div>
<div>study of cells is only equivalent to the level of telecommunications before</div>
<div>1948. Outwardly, before the advent of Shannon's information theory, the</div>
<div>central issue of telecommunications is "signal" rather than "information".</div>
<div>After that, the central issue of telecommunications is "information" rather</div>
<div>than "signal".</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>According to the application history of information concept, nearly all the</div>
<div>essential problems behind the concepts of communication, messenger, signal</div>
<div>and so on may be information problems. Just as the language problem what we</div>
<div>are discussing here, our ultimate goal is to analyze the information.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For the same reason, I recommend another two papers:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. Do Plants Think? (June 5, 2012, Scientific American)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(<a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-plants-think-daniel-chamovitz/#rd?sukey=fc78a68049a14bb24ce82efd8ef931e64057ce6142b1f2f7b919612d2b3f42c07f559f5be33be0881613ccfbf5b43c4b<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-plants-think-daniel-chamovitz%2F%23rd%3Fsukey%3Dfc78a68049a14bb24ce82efd8ef931e64057ce6142b1f2f7b919612d2b3f42c07f559f5be33be0881613ccfbf5b43c4b&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=2buOZeZpeC9UCNIIuY6bVfAr%2B4yOET6l35UU6ZwMhdU%3D&reserved=0>£©">http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-plants-think-daniel-chamovitz/#rd?sukey=fc78a68049a14bb24ce82efd8ef931e64057ce6142b1f2f7b919612d2b3f42c07f559f5be33be0881613ccfbf5b43c4b<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-plants-think-daniel-chamovitz%2F%23rd%3Fsukey%3Dfc78a68049a14bb24ce82efd8ef931e64057ce6142b1f2f7b919612d2b3f42c07f559f5be33be0881613ccfbf5b43c4b&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=2buOZeZpeC9UCNIIuY6bVfAr%2B4yOET6l35UU6ZwMhdU%3D&reserved=0>£©</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. Plants Can Think, Feel and Learn (December 3, 2014, New Scientist)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(<a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429980-400-root-intelligence-plants-can-think-feel-and-learn<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newscientist.com%2Farticle%2Fmg22429980-400-root-intelligence-plants-can-think-feel-and-learn&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=zfHmH3VG30OLHtjwoFmaVX2OVlwZRaxqdOXRIo69GMc%3D&reserved=0>">http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429980-400-root-intelligence-plants-can-think-feel-and-learn<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newscientist.com%2Farticle%2Fmg22429980-400-root-intelligence-plants-can-think-feel-and-learn&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=zfHmH3VG30OLHtjwoFmaVX2OVlwZRaxqdOXRIo69GMc%3D&reserved=0></a>)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From which we can judge whether or not a plants informatics can exists.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Xueshan</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From: <a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</a>></div>
<div>[<a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es>">mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es></a>]</div>
<div>On Behalf Of Sungchul Ji</div>
<div>Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 9:10 PM</div>
<div>To: Francesco Rizzo</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com">13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com</a><<a href="mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com>">mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com></a>>; Terrence</div>
<div>W. DEACON <<a href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu">deacon@berkeley.edu</a><<a href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu>">mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu></a>></div>
<div>Cc: Fis, <<a href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">fis@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>">mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es></a>></div>
<div>Subject: Re: [Fis] The unification of the theories of information based on</div>
<div>the cateogry theory</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hi Terry, and FISers,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Can it be that "language metaphor" is akin to a (theoretical) knife that, in</div>
<div>the hands of a surgeon, can save lives but, in a wrong hand, can kill?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>All the best.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sung</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>________________________________</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From: Francesco Rizzo</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com">13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com</a><<a href="mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com>">mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com></a>></div>
<div>Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 2:56:11 AM</div>
<div>To: Terrence W. DEACON</div>
<div>Cc: Fis,; Sungchul Ji</div>
<div>Subject: Re: [Fis] The unification of the theories of information based on</div>
<div>the cateogry theory</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Caro Terry estensibile a tutti,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>¨¨ sempre un piacere leggerTi e capirTi. La general theory of information ¨¨</div>
<div>preceduta da un sistema (o semiotica) di significazione e seguita da un</div>
<div>sistema (o semiotica ) di comunicazione. Tranne che quando si ha un processo</div>
<div>comunicativo come il passaggio di un Segnale (che non significa</div>
<div>necessariamente 'un segno') da una Fonte, attraverso un Trasmettitore,</div>
<div>lungo un Canale, a un Destinatario. In un processo tra macchina e macchina</div>
<div>il segnale non ha alcun potere 'significante'. In tal caso non si ha</div>
<div>significazione anche se si pu¨° dire che si ha passaggio di informazione.</div>
<div>Quando il destinatario ¨¨ un essere umano (e non ¨¨ necessario che la fonte</div>
<div>sia anch'essa un essere umano) si ¨¨ in presenza di un processo di</div>
<div>significazione. Un sistema di significazione ¨¨ una costruzione semiotica</div>
<div>autonoma, indipendente da ogni possibile atto di comunicazione che</div>
<div>l'attualizzi. Invece ogni processo di comunicazione tra esseri umani -- o</div>
<div>tra ogni tipo di apparato o struttura 'intelligente, sia meccanico che</div>
<div>biologico, -- presuppone un sistema di significazione come propria o</div>
<div>specifica condizione. In conclusione, ¨¨ possibile avere una semiotica della</div>
<div>significazione indipendente da una semiotica della comunicazione; ma ¨¨</div>
<div>impossibile stabilire una semiotica della comunicazione indipendente da una</div>
<div>semiotica della significazione.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Ho appreso molto da Umberto Eco a cui ho dedicato il capitolo 10. Umberto</div>
<div>Eco e il processo di re-interpretazione e re-incantamento della scienza</div>
<div>economica (pp. 175-217) di "Valore e valutazioni. La scienza dell'economia o</div>
<div>l'economia della scienza" (FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1997). Nello mio stesso</div>
<div>libro si trovano:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- il capitolo 15. Semiotica economico-estimativa (pp. 327-361) che si</div>
<div>colloca nel quadro di una teoria globale di tutti i sistemi di</div>
<div>significazione e i processi di comunicazione;</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- il sottoparagrafo 5.3.3 La psicologia genetica di Jean Piaget e la</div>
<div>neurobiologia di Humberto Maturana e Francesco Varela. una nuova</div>
<div>epistemologia sperimentale della qualit¨¤ e dell'unicit¨¤ (pp. 120-130).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chiedo scusa a Tutti se Vi ho stancati o se ancora una volta il mio scrivere</div>
<div>in lingua italiana Vi crea qualche problema. Penso che il dono che mi fate</div>
<div>¨¨, a proposito della QUALITA' e dell'UNICITA', molto pi¨´ grande del</div>
<div>(per)dono che Vi chiedo. Grazie.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Un saluto affettuoso.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Francecso</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2018-02-07 23:02 GMT+01:00 Terrence W. DEACON</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu">deacon@berkeley.edu</a><<a href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu>">mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu></a>>:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dear FISers,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In previous posts I have disparaged using language as the base model for</div>
<div>building a general theory of information.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Though I realize that this may seem almost heretical, it is not a claim that</div>
<div>all those who use linguistic analogies are wrong, only that it can be</div>
<div>causally misleading.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I came to this view decades back in my research into the neurology and</div>
<div>evolution of the human language capacity.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And it became an orgnizing theme in my 1997 book The Symbolic Species.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Early in the book I describe what I (and now other evolutionary biologists)</div>
<div>have come to refer to as a "porcupine fallacy" in evolutionary thinking.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Though I use it to critique a misleading evolutionary taxonomizing tendency,</div>
<div>I think it also applies to biosemiotic and information theoretic thinking as</div>
<div>well.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So to exemplify my reasoning (with apologies for quoting myself) I append</div>
<div>the following excerpt from the book.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"But there is a serious problem with using language as the model for</div>
<div>analyzing other</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>species¡¯ communication in hindsight. It leads us to treat every other form</div>
<div>of communication as</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>exceptions to a rule based on the one most exceptional and divergent case.</div>
<div>No analytic method</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>could be more perverse. Social communication has been around for as long as</div>
<div>animals have</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>interacted and reproduced sexually. Vocal communication has been around at</div>
<div>least as long as frogs</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>have croaked out their mating calls in the night air. Linguistic</div>
<div>communication was an afterthought,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>so to speak, a very recent and very idiosyncratic deviation from an ancient</div>
<div>and well-established</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>mode of communicating. It cannot possibly provide an appropriate model</div>
<div>against which to assess</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>other forms of communication. It is the rare exception, not the rule, and a</div>
<div>quite anomalous</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>exception at that. It is a bit like categorizing birds¡¯ wings with respect</div>
<div>to the extent they possess or</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>lack the characteristics of penguins¡¯ wings, or like analyzing the types of</div>
<div>hair on different mammals</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>with respect to their degree of resemblance to porcupine quills. It is an</div>
<div>understandable</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>anthropocentric bias¡ªperhaps if we were penguins or porcupines we might see</div>
<div>more typical wings</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>and hair as primitive stages compared to our own more advanced</div>
<div>adaptations¡ªbut it does more to</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>obfuscate than clarify. Language is a derived characteristic and so should</div>
<div>be analyzed as an</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>exception to a more general rule, not vice versa."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Of course there will be analogies to linguistic forms.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is inevitable, since language emerged from and is supported by a vast</div>
<div>nonlinguistic semiotic infrastructure.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So of course it will inherit much from less elaborated more fundamental</div>
<div>precursors.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And our familiarity with language will naturally lead us to draw insight</div>
<div>from this more familiar realm.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I just worry that it provides an elaborate procrustean model that assumes</div>
<div>what it endeavors to explain.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards to all, Terry</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Jose Javier Blanco Rivero</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:javierweiss@gmail.com">javierweiss@gmail.com</a><<a href="mailto:javierweiss@gmail.com>">mailto:javierweiss@gmail.com></a>> wrote:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In principle I agree with Terry. I have been thinking of this, though I am</div>
<div>still not able to make a sound formulation of the idea. Still I am afraid</div>
<div>that if I miss the chance to make at least a brief formulation of it I will</div>
<div>lose the opportunity to make a brainstorming with you. So, here it comes:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have been thinking that a proper way to distinguish the contexts in which</div>
<div>the concept of information acquires a fixed meaning or the many contexts on</div>
<div>which information can be somehow observed, is to make use of the distinction</div>
<div>between medium and form as developed by N. Luhmann, D. Baecker and E.</div>
<div>Esposito. I have already expressed my opinion in this group that what</div>
<div>information is depends on the system we are talking about. But the concept</div>
<div>of medium is more especific since a complex system ussualy has many sources</div>
<div>and types of information.</div>
<div>So the authors just mentioned, a medium can be broadly defined as a set of</div>
<div>loosely coupled elements. No matter what they are. While a Form is a</div>
<div>temporary fixed coupling of a limited configuration of those elements.</div>
<div>Accordingly, we can be talking about DNA sequences which are selected by RNA</div>
<div>to form proteins or to codify a especific instruction to a determinate cell.</div>
<div>We can think of atoms forming a specific kind of matter and a specific kind</div>
<div>of molecular structure. We can also think of a vocabulary or a set of</div>
<div>linguistic conventions making possible a meaningful utterance or discourse.</div>
<div>The idea is that the medium conditions what can be treated as information.</div>
<div>Or even better, each type of medium produces information of its own kind.</div>
<div>According to this point of view, information cannot be transmitted. It can</div>
<div>only be produced and "interpreted" out of the specific difference that a</div>
<div>medium begets between itself and the forms that take shape from it. A medium</div>
<div>can only be a source of noise to other mediums. Still, media can couple</div>
<div>among them. This means that media can selforganize in a synergetic manner,</div>
<div>where they depend on each others outputs or complexity reductions. And this</div>
<div>also mean that they do this by translating noise into information. For</div>
<div>instance, language is coupled to writing, and language and writing to print.</div>
<div>Still oral communication is noisy to written communication. Let us say that</div>
<div>the gestures, emotions, entonations, that we make when talking cannot be</div>
<div>copied as such into writing. In a similar way, all the social practices and</div>
<div>habits made by handwriting were distorted by the introduction of print. From</div>
<div>a technical point of view you can codify the same message orally, by writing</div>
<div>and by print. Still information and meaning are not the same. You can tell</div>
<div>your girlfriend you love her. That interaction face to face where the lovers</div>
<div>look into each others eye, where they can see if the other is nervous, is</div>
<div>trembling or whatever. Meaning (declaring love and what that implies:</div>
<div>marriage, children, and so on) and information (he is being sincere, she can</div>
<div>see it in his eye; he brought her to a special place, so he planned it, and</div>
<div>so on) take a very singular and untranslatable configuration. If you write a</div>
<div>letter you just can say "I love you". You shall write a poem or a love</div>
<div>letter. Your beloved would read it alone in her room and she would have to</div>
<div>imagine everything you say. And imagination makes information and meaning</div>
<div>to articulate quite differently as in oral communication. It is not the same</div>
<div>if you buy a love card in the kiosk and send it to her. Maybe you compensate</div>
<div>the simplicity of your message by adding some chocolates and flowers. Again,</div>
<div>information (jumm, lets see what he bought her) and meaning are not the</div>
<div>same. I use examples of social sciences because that is my research field,</div>
<div>although I have the intuition that it could also work for natural sciences.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>JJ</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>El feb 7, 2018 10:47 AM, "Sungchul Ji"</div>
<div><<a href="mailto:sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu">sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu</a><<a href="mailto:sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu>">mailto:sji@pharmacy.rutgers.edu></a>> escribi¨®:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hi FISers,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 10/8/2017, Terry wrote:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>" So basically, I am advocating an effort to broaden our discussions and</div>
<div>recognize that the term information applies in diverse ways to many</div>
<div>different contexts. And because of this it is important to indicate the</div>
<div>framing, whether physical, formal, biological, phenomenological, linguistic,</div>
<div>etc.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>. . . . . . The classic syntax-semantics-pragmatics distinction introduced</div>
<div>by Charles Morris has often been cited in this respect, though it too is in</div>
<div>my opinion too limited to the linguistic paradigm, and may be misleading</div>
<div>when applied more broadly. I have suggested a parallel, less linguistic (and</div>
<div>nested in Stan's subsumption sense) way of making the division: i.e. into</div>
<div>intrinsic, referential, and normative analyses/properties of information."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree with Terry's concern about the often overused linguistic metaphor in</div>
<div>defining "information". Although the linguistic metaphor has its</div>
<div>limitations (as all metaphors do), it nevertheless offers a unique advantage</div>
<div>as well, for example, its well-established categories of functions (see the</div>
<div>last column in Table 1.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The main purpose of this post is to suggest that all the varied theories of</div>
<div>information discussed on this list may be viewed as belonging to the same</div>
<div>category of ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation) diagrammatically represented</div>
<div>as the 3-node closed network in the first column of Table 1.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Table 1. The postulated universality of ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation)</div>
<div>as manifested in information theory, semiotics, cell language theory, and</div>
<div>linguistics.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Category Theory</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> f g</div>
<div> A -----> B ------> C</div>
<div> | ^</div>
<div> | |</div>
<div> |______________|</div>
<div> h</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Deacon¡¯s theory of information</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Shannon¡¯s</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Theory of</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>information</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Peirce¡¯s theory of signs</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cell language theory</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Human language</div>
<div>(Function)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Intrinsic information</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Source</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Object</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Nucleotides*/</div>
<div>Amion acids</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Letters</div>
<div>(Building blocks)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>B</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Referential information</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Message</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sign</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Proteins</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Words</div>
<div>(Denotation)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>C</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Normative information</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Receiver</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Interpretant</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Metabolomes</div>
<div>(Totality of cell metabolism)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Systems of words</div>
<div>(Decision making & Reasoning)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>f</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Encoding</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sign production</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Physical laws</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Second articulation</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>g</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Decoding</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sign interpretation</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Evoutionary selection</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>First and Third articulation</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>h</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Information flow</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Information flow</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Inheritance</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Grounding/</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Habit</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Scale</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Micro-Macro?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Macro</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Macro</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Micro</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Macro</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>*There may be more than one genetic alphabet of 4 nucleotides. According to</div>
<div>the "multiple genetic alphabet hypothesis', there are n genetic alphabets,</div>
<div>each consisting of 4^n letters, each of which in turn consisting of n</div>
<div>nucleotides. In this view, the classical genetic alphabet is just one</div>
<div>example of the n alphabets, i.e., the one with n = 1. When n = 3, for</div>
<div>example, we have the so-called 3rd-order genetic alphabet with 4^3 = 64</div>
<div>letters each consisting of 3 nucleotides, resulting in the familiar codon</div>
<div>table. Thus, the 64 genetic codons are not words as widely thought</div>
<div>(including myself until recently) but letters! It then follows that</div>
<div>proteins are words and metabolic pathways are sentences. Finally, the</div>
<div>transient network of metbolic pathways (referred to as "hyperstructures" by</div>
<div>V. Norris in 1999 and as "hypermetabolic pathways" by me more recently)</div>
<div>correspond to texts essential to represent arguement/reasoning/computing.</div>
<div>What is most exciting is the recent discovery in my lab at Rutgers that the</div>
<div>so-called "Planck-Shannon plots" of mRNA levels in living cells can identify</div>
<div>function-dependent "hypermetabolic pathways" underlying breast cancer before</div>
<div>and after drug treatment (manuscript under review).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Any comments, questions, or suggestions would be welcome.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sung</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________</div>
<div>Fis mailing list</div>
<div><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>></div>
<div><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0>">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0></a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________</div>
<div>Fis mailing list</div>
<div><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>></div>
<div><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0>">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0></a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>--</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Professor Terrence W. Deacon</div>
<div>University of California, Berkeley</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________</div>
<div>Fis mailing list</div>
<div><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>></div>
<div><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0>">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cca4905ddbcb943df537b08d56ec96c4c%7C927347c284584fde99b9ca9ba94d96e0%7C1%7C0%7C636536733755726637&sdata=ir%2FcgnTkNiV8YXWkbn3T4FULEtrqVHFhg%2FFFVuDc9IA%3D&reserved=0></a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________</div>
<div>Fis mailing list</div>
<div><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>></div>
<div><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=JTnL%2BthMsdQUEzTx%2F9UKr5xzKQom6%2FINA8VkaDyPI80%3D&reserved=0>">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Csji%40pharmacy.rutgers.edu%7Cd21bd1ad9ddf46d01a3e08d5720c681d%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636540320007030420&sdata=JTnL%2BthMsdQUEzTx%2F9UKr5xzKQom6%2FINA8VkaDyPI80%3D&reserved=0></a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- </div>
<div>Professor Terrence W. Deacon</div>
<div>University of California, Berkeley</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________</div>
<div>Fis mailing list</div>
<div><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a></div>
<div><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>