<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">Hey Carlos,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">< Perhaps we are confusing epistemology and ontology ></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">A bit differently from Krassimir, I suggest the two (epi. & onto.) are inextricably `informatically entwined' as energy-matter, but we too often confuse our 'levels of abstraction' in navigating a simple-to-complex cosmos (re Korzybski).</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">I refer you to my 13 February post where I answer Krassimir's question on 'energy and matter as information'.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">In that post I mention *HOW 'things' JOIN* which is synonymous with 'relational LOGIC' but which notably differs from Francis's 'relational AGENCY' even if they are directly related. In THAT post I build a 'relational model' from the ground up, unfolding in a MOST simple-onto-complex role, which includes ontology (HOW 'a thing' comes into EXISTENCE) and epistemology (HOW we KNOW 'a thing's' role) — all as realized 'inter-relating of things' (the HOW). I suggest this presents a comprehensive 'theory of meaning' (for ALL levels of abstraction) via 'functional (HOW) analysis'.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">The 'problem of subjectivity' (re Krassimir's note and Francis's paper) only arises at the 'level of agency', but not at the 'level of atoms'. For example, oxygen atoms do not '*adaptively* compete' with other oxygen atoms, or with Na or Cl atoms, etc. to maintain 'an identity' as *an atom*. Differently, agents continually compete for 'survival of identity', between species AND within species, where (subjective, individual) differences in (objective) sensorium and perceptual limits have a major (Life/Death) effect. This atom/agent difference also covers Alex's noted issues. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">It is for THIS reason I suggest the only useful way to cover ALL cases (the simple-to-complex), and avoid confusion, is to start from a most rudimentary level (re my 13 Feb post), suitably covering ALL LEVELS at the same time —plainly moving from simple-to-complex.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">Marcus</div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 12:19 AM Krassimir Markov <<a href="mailto:itheaiss@gmail.com">itheaiss@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><div><font size="4">Dear Carlos,</font></div>
<div><font size="4">The problem comes from not clearly defining the information
given by you in the pointed paper.</font></div>
<div><font size="4">Welcome to a subjective phenomenon called
“information”.</font></div>
<div><font size="4">Best wishes,</font></div>
<div><font size="4">Krassimir</font></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">На чт, 22.02.2024 г. в 22:01 Carlos Gershenson <<a href="mailto:cgershen@gmail.com" target="_blank">cgershen@gmail.com</a>> написа:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Dear all,<div><br></div><div>Perhaps we are confusing epistemology and ontology (model and the modeled). When I say that we can describe phenomena in terms of information, I am speaking at an epistemological level. <br id="m_-8201839845571650385m_-5602726141856402008lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br></div><div>Alex wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"times new roman",serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(11,83,148)">P.S. Since the world, particularly that of living forms, is </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"times new roman",serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(11,83,148)">extensively populated by critical points / instabilities, <br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"times new roman",serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(11,83,148)">the time evolution of the world cannot be fully described <br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"times new roman",serif;font-size:large;color:rgb(11,83,148)">by digital information. <br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The world (ontology) cannot be fully described (epistemology) anyhow. Our descriptions are always finite, the world is always infinite (you can always describe more aspects of it). The question is which limited description will be more useful for a given purpose. And the topic of this month is precisely trying to come up with a description useful for describing living systems. And perhaps this will be useful also for intelligence and complex systems in general.</div><div><br></div><div>Btw, physics and logics are just other sets of descriptions, but some confuse them with reality.</div><div><br></div><div>Last week I was speaking with Francis Heylighen (my PhD advisor), and he reminded me of his ontology of change, perhaps it would be worth taking a fresh look at it:</div><div><div title="Page 1"><div><div><p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:ArialUnicodeMS">Heylighen, F. (2023). Relational agency: a new ontology for co-evolving systems. In P. Corning (Ed.), Evolution ‘On Purpose’: Teleonomy in Living Systems (pp. 79-104). (Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology). MIT Press. <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14642.003.0008__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!X2-yq450cM7I2P30jwvh5dxIRYgWXSKlAlNbimPowqLcbrheoNS6-vs0HUfsf7rz0QYMsuxZX1PYcMxa$" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14642.003.0008</a> </span></p></div></div></div></div><div><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cris.vub.be/ws/portalfiles/portal/79556854/Heylighen_RelationalAgency.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!X2-yq450cM7I2P30jwvh5dxIRYgWXSKlAlNbimPowqLcbrheoNS6-vs0HUfsf7rz0QYMsuxZXzs8cdfY$" target="_blank">https://cris.vub.be/ws/portalfiles/portal/79556854/Heylighen_RelationalAgency.pdf</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Best wishes,</div></div><div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;border-spacing:0px"><div>Carlos</div></span></div></div>
</div>
<br></div></div></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>