<HTML xmlns:o><HEAD>
<META content="text/html charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV><FONT size=4>Dear Gordana, Bruno, and FIS Colleagues,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Yes, the Earth is flat! And this model had worked for
thousands of years.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Why not if it is useful to explain what humans had needed to
be explained.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>About the Mechanism: If this model is good it has to explain
the main difference between biological and digital worlds – biological creatures
need education to receive all knowledge they need.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Digital machines use simple “copy/past” like operations and
digital machines are “born” like Athena! In Greek mythology, Athena was
believed to have been born from the head of her father Zeus.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><STRONG>NOTE: AS SHE IS!</STRONG> No childhood, no education!
What to say – a mechanism had created another mechanism!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><FONT style="size: 4"><FONT style="size: 4">There is no model
without limitations.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Every model has it own limitations and we are obligated to
discover them.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Dear Bruno, please describe the limitations of your
model.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Friendly greetings</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Krassimir</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=marchal@ulb.ac.be
href="mailto:marchal@ulb.ac.be">Bruno Marchal</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 17, 2019 2:11 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=fis@listas.unizar.es
href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">fis</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Fis] New Perspectives. Reply to Bruno's Reply to
Stan</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>Dear
Gordana,
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I will try to answer your questions. It is not easy, because this belongs
to a very hot subject, and what I say is based on counter-intuitive, and not
very well known, results in mathematical logic, which is not very well taught,
if taught at all.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Note also that I am using the Digital Mechanist hypothesis as a working
hypothesis. I never claim that it is true, and my work has only shown that it is
testable, but eventually I can conclude that the experimental evidences favours
this hypothesis.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>On 14 Jun 2019, at 06:45, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <<A
href="mailto:gordana.dodig-crnkovic@mdh.se">gordana.dodig-crnkovic@mdh.se</A>>
wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">I have a few
questions to your answers and would be happy if you can help me to
understand.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Here they come,
following formulations from your mail.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“This seems to assume some primary
natural reality, isn’t it?”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN></B> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: What is
meant by “primary natural reality”? <o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">1. If it refers
to the <B>EXISTENCE</B> OF THE EXTERNAL/INTERNAL NATURAL WORLD, I think this
is the most reasonable hypothesis to start with:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">The
world/nature EXISTS. </SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">It is
the fundamental assumption of all sciences which are our best present
knowledge about the world.<B><o:p></o:p></B></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Otherwise, if the
world does not EXIST, we can conclude any discussion about
it.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So, this might already be in conflict with the Digital Mechanist hypothesis
(simply called Mechanism hereafter). I will come to that hypothesis later. What
I will say is derived in that theory.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We do agree that the physical-world/nature EXISTS. But with Mechanism, this
is no more something that we have to assume, its existence has to become a
theorem in the Mechanist theory. The physical reality does not disappear, but
its existence becomes phenomenological, and physics get reduced to arithmetic, a
bit like today most scientists would agree that chemistry is in principle
reducible to quantum physics, if we abstract from the level of organisation.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>By Mechanism (Digital Mechanism) I mean the assumption that there is a
level of description of my brain, or body, possibly including a finite part of
the environment, such that a digital emulation of my body made at that
description level would not change my first person conscious experience. </DIV>
<DIV>Mechanism is the belief that no organ in my body can’t be replaced by an
artificial prosthesis, and in particular, that we would survive, in the clinical
usual sense, with an artificial brain. Now, the level can be as much low as we
want, like copying the brain at the level of the quantum field description,
using the standard model of the particles, and using as many decimals as needed
as long as it is a finite number.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mechanism implies that physics has to be recovered from a statistics on
(pure) partially computable number relations, and this will lead to the fact
that neither matter nor consciousness are Turing emulable, contrary to a
widespread confusion. Somehow, if “I” am a machine, everything else cannot be a
machine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Eventually, mechanism makes very elementary arithmetic into the theory of
everything, but any Turing-complete (rich enough to define the notion of
computation) theory can be used. Indeed, physics becomes independent of the
ontological theory: they all lead to the same physics.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So, to answer your question: YES, the physical reality exists. But NO, it
is not primary, which means that we don’t have to assume a natural world, we
have to explain its appearance from a theory of consciousness or from some
“theology”, in the pre-christian sense of the word. Today’s theology is still in
the hands of institutions which practice the argument of authority, which is
invalid with the scientific method.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What many people ignore is that the discovery of computation and
computability has been done by mathematician, and those notion have been shown
to be even *arithmetical*. A computer is an implementation in the physical
reality of a universal machine, which is an object already implemented in all
universal environment just through natural number relations. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A universal machine cannot distinguish a physical computations from an
arithmetical one, by introspection, and that enforce us to explain why the
physical laws must be reduced to a statistics on "number's dreams” in
arithmetic. This leads quickly to some “many-world” interpretation of elementary
arithmetic, and it is testable by comparing the mathematics of that many-worlds,
or better “many-histories” interpretation of arithmetic (or Turing equivalent)
with the observations.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">2. The other
question is <B>HOW</B> that EXISTENCE of the world outside/inside cognitive
agents presents itself or unfolds in an agent in the interaction with the
world.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">That is the
question of UMWELT, and the construction of knowledge through information
processing. (Natural information processing = natural
computation.)</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As a consequence of above, the natural computation emerges from the
arithmetical computations. (I assume Mechanism all along).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">The “primary
natural reality” reflects itself in a myriad of local “realities” in cognizing
agents. As we know from empirical observations, even though existence of the
world induces various information processes in various agents, communities of
agents are typically sharing common “languages” about that “primary natural
reality”.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes. If Mechanism would lead to solipsism, that would be enough for me to
abandon it. Fortunately, the universal machine discourse explains already why
some dreams get very long and sharable among population of universal
machine/numbers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">That is true for
bacterial as well as for human communities.
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Note that I discovered computer science in molecular biology books. I would
have become a biologist if I did not discover that the conceptual explanation of
reproduction (which fascinated me in biology) was already implemented in the
arithmetical reality. </DIV>
<DIV>After Gödel, we know that this is not a reductionist view, as such a
reality is beyond all possible effective theories. Here, sometimes people
confuse the arithmetical reality and the theories we built to put some light on
that reality. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Languages reflect
our ability to collectively navigate “primary natural reality” and share
common references. So much so that we are able to commonly build a new
semantic layer, that is human culture, upon that “primary natural
reality”.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Why primary? I am OK with what you say here, except that what you call
“primary natural reality” is no more primary. It is already a sort of
unavoidable social cultural building by the universal numbers in
arithmetic.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The logical dependency is like this:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>NUMBERS => CONSCIOUSNESS => PHYSICAL-REALITY =>
HUMAN-CONSCIOUSNESS</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The arithmetical structure, which follows from the definition of addition
and multiplication, determine a consciousness flux which differentiate itself in
arithmetic, and the natural world appearance emerges from the first person
(singular and plural) view of the universal numbers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Consciousness can be quasi-axiomatically defined by</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>True,</DIV>
<DIV>Indubitable,</DIV>
<DIV>Immediate,</DIV>
<DIV>Non provable,</DIV>
<DIV>Non definable</DIV>
<DIV>+ (with Mechanism) invariant for some digital functional substitution made
at some description level.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“As I have shown, this requires a non
computationalist theory of mind, which seems to me to be highly
speculative.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q:</SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">
<B>Why would that follow from the EXISTENCE of the world?</B> <B>What kind of
phenomenon is that “computation” which minds perform? </B>Is it the Turing
model of discrete sequential symbol manipulation – calculation of mathematical
function? </SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes. I sum up often Mechanism by “Yes Doctor + Church’s thesis”. The notion
of computations is the one discovered by many people like Emil Post, Alan
Turing, Alonzo Church. Gödel discovered it implicitly, and already show it to be
an arithmetical notion. He missed the Church-Turing thesis though, and the
consequence of mechanism.</DIV>
<DIV>Computations exists like prime number exists. The physical reality is
secondary, and physics is in principle reduced to very elementary arithmetic.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">It may at best
describe linguistic part of the
mind.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is described in the mind of the universal machine/number.
Interestingly, they can only describe a part of this. Many arithmetical truth
concerning those machine are extra-linguistic, and does not admit any third
person description. They are not definable.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The universal numbers/machine can be shown to have a soul (in Plato’s
sense, not Aristotle’s sense), and the universal numbers, in particular also
those implemented in the physical reality, already knows that they have a soul,
and that their soul are NOT a machine, nor anything describable in third person
term. It is more like the meaning, and like the syntax.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In fact, a universal machine can refute all complete effective theories
that we may use to study them. The universal machine is born universal
dissident. They break down all reductionist conception of themselves.</DIV>
<DIV>After Gödel and Tarski, we know that most of the arithmetical reality will
be unprovable by any machine, but a part of that non provable reality is still
experienceable and knowable by other (tag provability) diverse means. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">But mind as a
natural process is both data-based (even continuous data)
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>OK. Mechanism proves the necessary existence of at least one continuous
observable, even of a non computable one.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">and symbol based.
Not Turing computable in it entirety,
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>OK. Mechanism makes both consciousness and matter NON computable. That is
why your approach is interesting in practice, probably even necessary. With
Mechanism, only the assumption of primaries would be wrong. In arithmetic,
The machines are confronted all the time to a non entirely computable reality.
The machines are themselves only partial computable, and most of the
arithmetical reality is highly not computable, and plays a role in the
development of mind.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">but “naturally
computable” i.e. the result of natural information processing performed by
living embodied minds.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I use computable in the mathematical sense of Church and Turing. I would
use here “naturally experienceable”, or “naturally manageable” or something. I
am aware of many attempt to define different sort of computations, but they have
no corresponding “Church’s thesis”, and usually, they are Turing emulable, or
they use non computable elements that it is simpler to recover from the first
person indeterminacy imposed by incompleteness to all machines. If not, it looks
like assuming something just to add complications, when the complications is
already there.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“I am not sure we can avoid the
mind-body problem in a philosophy of information context</SPAN></B><SPAN
lang=EN-US>.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: Why?
Natural information processes in living organisms seem to me as the best way
to bridge the mind-body chasm</SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">. Mind is a result of a complex network of networks of
information processes going on in a cognizing agent. That process is
implemented in their bodies as a material substrate that is self-organized
structure growth from that <B>“primary natural reality”</B>. There is no
contradiction between the morphology (shape, structure, material) of an
organism and its functions (processes performed by that morphology. At least
those organisms who have nervous systems capable of representing their bodies
and their relationships to their environments can be seen as possessing
intrinsic “self-models” or simply having “self” or “mind”. That “mind” is the
result of the relationships of its subsystems that constitute that “self”,
that process which for an organism makes a distinction between the “self” vs.
the world and the relationships between the two.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Mind is a
process, matter is its substrate on which the process is going on. Those are
inseparable in a living organism. In-formation has it roots in the concept of
formation (of a material substrate). Matter and form are two aspects of the
same reality. It is not a problem, it is a way how we conceptualize the world,
in order to manage its complexity.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With mechanism, mind is a process. OK. But there is no substrate. That is a
necessary collective hallucination coming from the differentiation of
consciousness in arithmetic. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is admittedly counter-intuitive/ There is no ontological/primary
space, nor time, nor particles, nor energy, nor waves, etc. But the conscious
appearance of this can be explained, in a precise way enough to be tested (and
thanks to quantum mechanics, which I predicted before realising that the
physicists were already there, we get confirmations of this).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With Mechanism we are back at Pythagorus. There is only numbers and the
only laws are addition and multiplication. With this we can define computations,
and the appearance of ontological/primary space, time, particles, energy, waves,
… is explained by the theory of machine’s consciousness.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“There are no evidences for
physicalism or for a physical primary reality, nor are there evidences for a
non computationalist theory of mind.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></B> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: What is
meant with “physicalism” here?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Wikipedia offers
two different definitions, <A
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism</A>
according to which<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">Physicalism</SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"> is the </SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: #0432ff"><A
title=Metaphysical href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical"><SPAN
lang=EN-US>metaphysical</SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"> thesis assuming that<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">a) <B>"everything
is physical"</B>, that there is "nothing over and above" the
physical,</SPAN><SUP><SPAN style="COLOR: #0432ff"><A
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism#cite_note-1"><SPAN
lang=EN-US>[1]</SPAN></A></SPAN></SUP><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">
or <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">b) that
<B>everything </B></SPAN><B><SPAN style="COLOR: #0432ff"><A
title=Supervenience href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervenience"><SPAN
lang=EN-US>supervenes</SPAN></A></SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"> on the physical</SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">.</SPAN><SUP><SPAN style="COLOR: #0432ff"><A
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism#cite_note-DStoljar-2">[2]</A></SPAN></SUP><SPAN
style="COLOR: #0432ff"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Those are two
very different proposals. The first one is obviously false, as it negates all
the emergent levels of organization of the world above
physics.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With mechanism, the physical level is itself an emergent level of
organisation above arithmetic. Nature is no more primary in the sense that we
can explain it without an ontological commitment in some physical universe.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is not exactly like a dream, but like infinitely many dreams
statistically interfering.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">The second one
depends on what is meant by “<B>supervenience”</B>. If it means that<B>
</B>higher levels of organization of matter-energy emerge from the lower ones
bringing completely new properties, it is in perfect agreement with what
sciences today say about the world and how they model the
world.*<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Molecules are
made of atoms but bring completely new possibilities of structures, processes
and interactions. Biology is more than chemistry for the same reason.
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes, but with mechanism, physicalism is false in the sense that the
physical reality is due to a psychological phenomenon. A very precise one, which
should give the laws of physics, so we can test empirically Mechanism, and the
test made until today confirms mechanism. That does not prove it to be true, of
course.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: What would
be “a physical primary reality”?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Am I wrong if I
imagine that I cannot go out of this room through its walls? Does not that
mean that there is “a physical primary reality” that stops me from doing so,
no matter how much I wish and try?</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Not really. In most of my dreams, I cannot go through wall too. It just
means that there is wall, and that we cannot go through. It does not mean that a
wall really exist, just that some dreams are lawful, and this is what mechanism
show to exist statistically.</DIV>
<DIV>Note that with both Digital Mechanism, and quantum physics, we can go
through wall (!), but the probability of that event is shown, in quantum
physics, to be very rare for massive object, and yet common for very small
object. That is used in the miniaturisation of the transistor, which makes up
the physical computer around us.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“Of course some people confuse the
evidences for physical laws with evidences that such laws are primary, but
that is just because they “believe” in some natural world to begin
with.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: What is
primary?</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=EN-US> </SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">Indeed, physical laws are not <B>primary</B>, in the
sense of eternal and unchangeable, as they evolve with the universe*.
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am not sure if many physicist would agree with this. I don’t know a
physical laws which would have evolved, except in speculative theory used to
explain the big-bang. With mechanism, the laws of physics becomes eternal and
unchangeable laws derivable from their theology/psychology/biology, which are
themselves eternal and unchangeable, given that they belong to
arithmetic/computer science. The only things which change are the indexical
notion, like here and now, or me and you, which are related to interval view of
arithmetic from arithmetic. </DIV>
<DIV>Physicalism is mainly the idea that there is an ontological physical
universe, and that the fundamental laws on which everything supervene are the
physical law. With Mechanism this can be shown leading to contradiction, en
eventually we need to derive the physical laws from number psychology/theology.
Then incompleteness provides the tools for doing this, and to make the testing.
Mechanism makes metaphysics into a science, even an experimental science.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Primary is the
<B>EXISTENCE</B> of the world that we all share and
experience.</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That remains correct if by world you mean the (standard) arithmetical
reality. The physical world is an emergent organisation coming from the (non
trivial and irreducible) arithmetic, taken in its after-Gödel understanding.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Many people agree that Gödel’s theorem kills the reductionist conception of
man and mathematics, but it kills already the reductionist conception on natural
numbers and machines.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mechanism leads to a sort of fictionalism for analysis, set theory and
physics. A physical universe becomes a convenient fiction invented by the
numbers to figure out what they are, somehow. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">It presents
itself in both fluid, intrinsic ways (subjective feelings and emotions) and
crisp, well defined inter-subjective forms (as in sciences, logics,
mathematics).</SPAN><B></B></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>OK. But with mechanism, the physical somehow arise from the natural or
canonical inter-subjective agreement between all universal
machines/number.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To help a bit, I always fix one universal system in my head, say the
programming language LISP. Then we can enumerate all machines (Lisp program), by
length order, and by alphabetical order for those having the same length. This
permits the enumeration of all partial computable functions (which include the
total one, defined on all numbers). I identify a machine with its number in that
enumeration (like we can identify a vectors with its coordinate once we have
chosen a basis in linear algebra).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US>“We can’t have both Mechanism in
cognitive science, and materialism, or just physicalism, in the “natural
science”. That has been shown logically
inconsistent.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">It depends on the
choice of “mechanism”, “cognitive science” (classical-computationalist
disembodied or contemporary EEEE models of cognition), along with the kind of
“physicalism” assumed, and even the choice of “natural sciences” to support
your thesis. In the paper below (*) I argue, for a given choice of all those
terms and with heavy reliance on the contemporary scientific knowledge, that
computational mind is not only (naturally) compatible but essentially
dependent on its physical substrate on succession of levels of organization.
</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That is true for the human mind. And it is important for the human
application. But with mechanism, eventually, we get very close to de Chardin,
when he says that we are not humans having spiritual existence, but we are
spiritual beings having a human existence. We are not human thinking about
numbers, but we are numbers thinking about humans.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">Q: If we have
such model </SPAN></B><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">in which
“mechanisms” of information processing (natural computation in the framework
of computing nature) from the lowest levels of exchanges between elementary
particles to the highest levels of exchanges among people of symbolic
structures and artifacts, wouldn’t that constitute a counter-example to the
claim that mind and body have nothing to do with each other ?
(**)</SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With Mechanism, we have the curious, non Aristotelian, consequences that
bodies are constructs of the mind, but also a result of the fact that we don’t
know which computations, among an infinities in arithmetic, supports us. </DIV>
<DIV>A material reality, with some primitive substrate, is unable to select a
computation from the infinitely many computations going through our state in
arithmetic. That would require an added non computational ability to the brain
or to the particles, or whatever we assume to be physically primary.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the overall picture is the same, except that the physical supervene of
the number theology which supervene on elementary arithmetic.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is not necessarily a pleasant theory, as we can no more die in this
theory, consciousness becomes a sort of inescapable prison, and arithmetic, if
it contains some paradise, contains also some hell, etc. What is nice, is that
it is a vaccine against reductionism of both man and machine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I hope this helps. I refer to my papers for the proof of the assertions,
and the description of why we can say that most of current physics favours
mechanism on naturalism. With the important understanding that this does not
mean that nature does not exist or is not important. It is only not primarily
real.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Like I say above, we get:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>NUMBERS => CONSCIOUSNESS => PHYSICAL-REALITY =>
HUMAN-CONSCIOUSNESS</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Many posts in this list plays on the </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PHYSICAL-REALITY => HUMAN-CONSCIOUSNESS,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>part, where I have no critics. But sometimes some people seems to conclude
that digital machine, à-la Church and Turing cannot be subject of private
conscious experience, which is a string assumption, and indeed it is needed to
have a primary reality. I prefer to remain open to Mechanism, and which case,
that part going from the physical reality to the human consciousness is itself a
consequence of us being universal number, borrowing the consciousness common to
all universal machine, which is also the consciousness we should come back in
some state of sleep, and plausibly after the death of the biological body.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I hoping this is not too much shocking. Please ask any question if
something is not clear. I do agree with many important points made in this list
by diverse people, but sometimes, some comments are presented like if it was in
contradiction with Digital Mechanism, when in fact they are confirming long term
prediction I derived from it. I hesitate to make my point, because it is
of no use in any direct applications. It concerns more the afterlife than life
per se. But as it predicts the very weird quantum computing notion,I tend to
think that nature confirms all this (which again is not an argument for saying
it has to be true, of course) and can be helpful to get rid of the reductionist
19th century conception of numbers and machines. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kind Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bruno</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV lang=SV vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff">Gordana<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">* <A
href="http://www.gordana.se/work/PUBLICATIONS-files/2019-Laws%20of%20Science%20as%20Laws%20of%20Nature.pdf"><SPAN
style="COLOR: #0432ff">http://www.gordana.se/work/PUBLICATIONS-files/2019-Laws%20of%20Science%20as%20Laws%20of%20Nature.pdf</SPAN></A>
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="COLOR: #0432ff"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US style="COLOR: #0432ff">** No model or
framework can explain everything about the world (including humans) at the
same time, but info-computational approach can be used to model some
interesting aspects of the mind emergent from, in interaction with its
matter/energy substrate.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">From: </SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Fis <<A
href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</A>>
on behalf of Bruno Marchal <<A
href="mailto:marchal@ulb.ac.be">marchal@ulb.ac.be</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Thursday, 13 June 2019 at 15:11<BR><B>To: </B>fis <<A
href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">fis@listas.unizar.es</A>><BR><B>Subject:
</B>Re: [Fis] New Perspectives. Reply to Stan<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>Joseph, <o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt" type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>On 12 Jun 2019, at 16:40, Joseph Brenner <<A
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch">joe.brenner@bluewin.ch</A>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'>Stan,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'>Thank
you for your question. I reply with a modified excerpt from an article
in<SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><I>Philosophies.<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></I>The full article is Open
Access. I am indebted to Rafael Capurro for part of this formulation.
Comments welcome.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'>Best
wishes,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'>Joseph</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>Natural
Philosophy: Excerpt from Brenner, J. 2018. The Naturalization of Natural
Philosophy.<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space><I> </I></SPAN><I>Philosophies<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><B>2018<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></B></I>3, 41.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 35.4pt"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>Natural
Philosophy deals with the question of nature as a whole stated by beings
(ourselves) that find themselves in nature without having the possibility of
a holistic view, being ourselves in nature and not beyond it. The fact that
we are able to ask this question means that we have some kind of
pre-knowledge about nature as a whole while at the same time this
pre-knowledge is problematic, otherwise we would not ask the question and
would not be able to become natural philosophers.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 35.4pt"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>The
question then changes to the difference between nature and reality as a
whole, including fictions, non-verifiable beliefs and intangible objects of
thought. Since the idea that classical Natural Philosophy evolved into
science seems correct, we are left,
for the domain of Natural Philosophy, with
only a speculative interpretation of nature viewed in its entirety. This
interpretation is,<SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><I>ipso
facto</I>, at a lower ontological level than the science which has largely
replaced it. Much of the 20th Century linguistic turn, expressed in both
analytical and phenomenological and residual transcendental traditions, is
well visible in contemporary philosophy.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 35.4pt"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>The
reaction to this unsatisfactory state of affairs has been the reinstatement
of realisms and materialisms of various kinds, associated today with the
names of Derrida, Badiou, Zizek, and others. The ‘ontological turn’ in
philosophy is a term of art that designates dissatisfaction with
descriptions of reality based on analytical, semantic criteria of truth.
Starting with Heidegger’s critique of hermeneutics and the basing of
philosophy on human life, the ontological turn is a challenge to neo-Kantian
epistemologies, and looks to what the structure of the world might be like
to enable scientific, that is, non-absolute knowledge. Unfortunately,
ontological theories have been hobbled by the retention of static terms
whose characteristics are determined by bivalent logic. In 2002, Priest
suggested that such an ontological turn in philosophy was taking place, away
from language in the direction of an contradictorial view of reality. Priest
proposed paraconsistent logic as appropriate to this turn, but his system
suffers from the epistemological limitations of paraconsistency. Lupasco, on
the other hand, anticipated the ontological turn by some 60 years. (In the
complete article, I show that his logical system can be used to
differentiate between Natural Philosophy and Philosophy<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><I>tout court.</I>)</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 35.4pt"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>The
most important point for me is that Natural Philosophy tells us something
real about the world that is consistent with our best science, physical,
biological and cognitive. Speculative philosophy can always re-illuminate
‘eternal’ questions such as what it means to be a thinking being in a
non-thinking environment. This non-Natural Philosophy, to repeat, exists for
‘natural’ reasons: it is a natural necessity for human beings to create it,
by a natural process, but it is not part of nature<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><I>qua</I><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>content.<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>This seems to assume some primary natural reality, isn’t
it?<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>As I have shown, this requires a non computationalist
theory of mind, which seems to me to be highly
speculative.<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>I am not sure we can avoid the mind-body problem in a
philosophy of information context. <o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>There are no evidences for physicalism or for a physical
primary reality, nor are there evidences for a non computationalist theory of
mind. Of course some people confuse the evidences for physical laws with
evidences that such laws are primary, but that is just because they “believes”
in some natural world to begin with. I think it is better to be agnostic and
see where the facts (experimental) and working theories lead
us.<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>We can’t have both Mechanism in cognitive science, and
materialism, or just physicalism, in the “natural science”. That has been
shown logically inconsistent (ask for reference if
interested).<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>Bruno<o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt" type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Arial",sans-serif; COLOR: navy'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><SPAN
lang=EN-US style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>
<HR align=center SIZE=0 width="100%">
</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
lang=EN-US style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'>Fis [<A
href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</A>]<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><B>On Behalf Of<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></B>Stanley N
Salthe<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>mardi,
11 juin 2019 21:09<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>fis<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Re: [Fis] New
Perspectives</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>Joseph --
Would you like to write how you define Natural
Philosophy?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>STAN<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>On Tue, Jun
11, 2019 at 12:03 PM<SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Joseph
Brenner<SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><<A
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch">joe.brenner@bluewin.ch</A>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 0cm; PADDING-LEFT: 6pt; MARGIN: 5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc 1pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm"
type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>Dear Pedro and
All,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>Many thanks are due to
you, Pedro, for this new and valuable formulation of the – daunting - task
at hand. The task is logical and philosophical, as well as scientific.
Philosophy here, exemplified by the Philosophy of Information, does not
mean standard discussions of ‘where did we come from’ and ‘does a
transcendent deity exist’, which are as sterile in their way as the
excesses of the IT and AI ideologists. Natural Philosophy can be a
‘vehicle’ for interaction between people of good will, the collaboration
that you point to that may help to advance IS4SI. Some of you who may not
have been at the Conference in San Francisco (Berkeley) may wish to look
at abstracts of papers from the Philosophy of Information sub-conferences
at the 2015, 2017 and 2019 Summit conferences on Information.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>To revitalize the list is
indeed a key first step. But it starts, in my opinion, with some
self-examination, examination of whether one’s own theories are just ‘pet’
theories. Applying this criterion to my own Logic in Reality, about which
I have written on several occasions, I claim that it is not just a pet
theory. It is a new perspective on how information, logic and thought
operate as real processes, following laws within the laws of physics,
without loss of a human, ethical dimension. However, LIR makes many
demands on one. It requires an understanding and acceptance of what is
/<I>not</I>/ Natural Philosophy, which may include some of the ideas that
have appeared in this list. </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>Again, accepting my own
criterion of interactive non-separability, I do not call for any
exclusions or limitations on the list. I only wish that everyone makes the
necessary effort to position his or her own views in relation to the
overriding need for furthering the Common Good. The sum of all such honest
self-referential (or second-order recursive) opinions of people about
their own work would itself be a useful creative effort, I
think.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>Thank you and best
wishes,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Lucida Sans Unicode",serif'>Joseph<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: Fis [mailto:<A
href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es"
target=_blank>fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</A>] On Behalf Of Pedro C.
Marijuan<BR>Sent: mardi, 11 juin 2019 13:05<BR>To: 'fis'<BR>Subject: [Fis]
New Perspectives</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Dear FIS
Colleagues,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>A few days ago took
place the IS4SI Meeting, in SFco, with one of the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>parallel sessions
devoted to FIS and other sessions also with presence<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>of veteran parties of
this list. Relevant speakers in the plenary<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>sessions covered the
main topic of the conference, expressed as: Where<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>is the I in Artificial
Intelligence and the Meaning in Information? From<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Tristan Harris to
Melanie Mitchell, to Paul Verschure, etc.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>In my view the
perspectives in these IT fields are changing<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>significantly. The
tremendous hype in AI, Deep Learning, IOT, etc. keeps<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>unabated, but critical
voices are being heard, not just from a few<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Academia corners as
usual, but now by leading technologists and<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>researchers of big
companies in these very fields. "Dissent" on the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>contents,
methodologies, and consequences of social applications is
growing.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>The industrial
development of this IT sector --notwithstanding the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>inflated proclamations
and all the hype of the gurus-- does not mean the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>arrival of some great
singularity, or the symbiosis with machines, or<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>widespread menace of
robots & cyborgs... these are slogans coming from<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>the industrialists to
maintain social/ideological preeminence for their<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>whole sector. Rather I
think they are starting to feel the consequences<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>of their social
overstretching in different ways.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>The fundamental point,
in my opinion, is that our solitary, isolated<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>efforts from a few
Academia places (Sciences & Humanities) in the quest<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>for new perspectives
in Information Science, and not just AI<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>development, should
not isolated any more. We can now establish an<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>interesting dialog and
partnership with those new "dissenters" of the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>technology in its
concepts, methods, and social applications. It is upon<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>us to improve the
discussion procedures, the collaborations, the<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>organization, etc. so
that this opportunity might materialize<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>progressively. Do not
ask me how... In any case I pointed out three<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>future directions for
IS4SI advancement: community building, attracting<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>scientific/technological
avantgarde, and organizational improvement.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Revitalizing this
discussion list--shouldn't it be one of the first steps?</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Best greetings to
all,</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>--Pedro</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>-------------------------------------------------</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Pedro C.
Marijuán</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Grupo de
Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'><A
href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es"
target=_blank>pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fpedrocmarijuan%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786234083&sdata=rRk9RxUKvWoq1nnH7eSkg5gRTil1tVUTgTK0pDa5Ihg%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank>http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/</A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>-------------------------------------------------</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>---</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>El software de
antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de
virus.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast.com%2Fantivirus&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786234083&sdata=Wbrn7sp1W%2Fg4GOIdAmb0U1geydhcdm%2FOX6Hu5N7Lc3k%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank>https://www.avast.com/antivirus</A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>_______________________________________________</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'>Fis mailing
list</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'><A
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es"
target=_blank>Fis@listas.unizar.es</A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext><SPAN lang=EN-US
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"'><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786244082&sdata=%2BSp0SCZdqFLqq%2FPes13pr84YSlKm03qEikuJ5vzJ2CQ%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=gmail-m_8386423096837602299DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable
style="BORDER-TOP: #d3d4de 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: medium none"
cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 border=1>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD
style="BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; WIDTH: 27.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0.75pt; PADDING-TOP: 9pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0.75pt"
width=37>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast.com%2Fsig-email%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Demailclient&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786244082&sdata=E3huy%2FK%2BF2q8BQYe%2FpMNb5mXlwom5sE3WuctW2DVN2M%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; TEXT-DECORATION: none"><SPAN
style="BORDER-TOP: windowtext 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: windowtext 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: windowtext 1pt solid; COLOR: blue; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 0cm; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT: windowtext 1pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<OBJECT id=_x0000_i1025 style="HEIGHT: 0.302in; WIDTH: 0.479in"
border=0 alt="Image removed by sender." data="cid:~WRD000.jpg"
width=46 height=29
type=application/x-apple-msg-attachment></OBJECT></SPAN></SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></TD>
<TD
style="BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; WIDTH: 235pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0.75pt; PADDING-TOP: 8.5pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0.75pt"
width=313>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="LINE-HEIGHT: 9pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 6.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Arial",sans-serif; COLOR: #41424e'>Garanti
sans virus.<SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast.com%2Fsig-email%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Demailclient&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786254081&sdata=TeOIk53ReL3Aw0mMz3wLptFb2cmnkwV7enRUKCWARyo%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: #4453ea">www.avast.com</SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif'>_______________________________________________<BR>Fis
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es"
target=_blank>Fis@listas.unizar.es</A><BR><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786254081&sdata=NgDErO3w5%2B7%2FDm3G3dobqSaXFjrR6EAlvN32HliQgpM%3D&reserved=0"
target=_blank>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<BR>Fis
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</A><BR><A
href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=02%7C01%7Cgordana.dodig-crnkovic%40mdh.se%7Ce3cf40966de148aaf4b108d6f0009e4b%7Ca1795b64dabd4758b988b309292316cf%7C0%7C0%7C636960282786264068&sdata=%2F3c%2BLJrQ9VLXSWXyuWjGNwdxCc2QSslqv%2BIyz%2F1ooX8%3D&reserved=0">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</A><o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV
class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<STYLE><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Lucida Sans Unicode";
panose-1:2 11 6 2 3 5 4 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.msonormal, li.msonormal, div.msonormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
h3
{mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 3 Char";
margin-top:2.0pt;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
page-break-after:avoid;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif;
color:#1f3763;
font-weight:normal;}
a:link, span.msohyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.msohyperlinkfollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msolistparagraph, li.msolistparagraph, div.msolistparagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
p.gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext, li.gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext, div.gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext
{mso-style-name:gmail-m8386423096837602299msoplaintext;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.emailstyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.heading3char
{mso-style-name:"Heading 3 Char";
mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 3";
font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif;
color:#1f3763;}
.msochpdefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page wordsection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.wordsection1
{page:wordsection1;}
--></STYLE>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Fis mailing
list<BR>Fis@listas.unizar.es<BR>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>