<div dir="ltr">Dear Folks,<div>I maintain that there still continues a confusion about the aim of the cybernetic work of Maturana,Uribe and Varela, particularly if the criticisms are in the form of</div><div>the clear need for detailed understanding of just how life processes work. Who can deny that? MUV point out that a living organism consists in an organization that keeps replenishing its materiality while at the same time maintaining its organization. They further raise the question about how such organization can arise in the first place, giving a very elementary example of such an emergence. In this way they provide a framework for thinking about organization and process that is more general than biology and that lets one think about these matters without dogma. In order to do so, one must avoid making dogma out of MUV and now we arrive at the problem. The problem, as I see it, is in academic discussion -- which normally depends on making references to previously published work, each such work being regarded as some kind of steppingstone to the building of an imagined edifice of thought. But you just cannot maintain that sort of structure unless you have the kind of foundational criticism as occurs in some parts of science such as in physics an mathematics but is unfortunately not present elsewhere. One can eventually discard the shells of useless thought (like phlogiston). MUV is not providing us with a possible phlogiston. They are providing us with general principles of organization for structures that persist in time. It is not time yet to discard these ideas.</div><div>Best,</div><div>Lou</div><div> </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 3:39 PM Pedro C. Marijuán <<a href="mailto:pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com">pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div>Dear List,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let me start by recognizing Kate Peil
and Lou Kauffman for their work in the session on Karl's legacy.
Kate has written a thoughtful summary of Karl's main views that
can be downloaded from fis web pages, at: <b><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://fis.sciforum.net/resources/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XnqxvPkY3DZ0qm24FtSwHBLsPRrbl4YHc1CDT3u8HMVP2dum7rgwsbIydFJ0LNUBEpVZvOWMkfhlpVK3$" target="_blank">https://fis.sciforum.net/resources/</a>
</b> Have a glance, "merece la pena" as we say in Spanish. Also,
the session was recorded and will appear in IAIS Dialogs: <b><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/@IAISDIALOGUES__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XnqxvPkY3DZ0qm24FtSwHBLsPRrbl4YHc1CDT3u8HMVP2dum7rgwsbIydFJ0LNUBEpVZvOWMkXRQTcUy$" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/@IAISDIALOGUES</a></b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>About AP, please note that it was
proposed as a pandisciplinary or metatheory of cognition for the
whole living. Interesting in the 70s in spite of its evident lack
of biological substance, but 50 years ago the accumulation of
anomalies (I telegraphed a few of them) have made its maintenance
really problematic--as Kuhn would have said. That it can be
supported by people working in mathematical or logical or
philosophical grounds is OK, but remember please that "the tree of
knowledge" was proposed not exactly for those fields but for the
entire life. As wikipedia blandly acknowledges: "The influence of
<i>Autopoiesis</i> in mainstream biology was limited. Autopoiesis
is not commonly used as the criterion for life...", citing from an
aggiornamento proposed by Razeto-Barry, Pablo (October 2012). <span><cite id="m_-7683660125721866156CITEREFRazeto-Barry2012"><a rel="nofollow" href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232231194__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XnqxvPkY3DZ0qm24FtSwHBLsPRrbl4YHc1CDT3u8HMVP2dum7rgwsbIydFJ0LNUBEpVZvOWMkX_Aal-W$" target="_blank">"Autopoiesis
40 Years Later. A Review and A Reformulation"</a>. <i>Origins
of Life</i>. <b>42</b> (6): <span>543–</span>567.</cite></span></div>
<div><span><cite id="m_-7683660125721866156CITEREFRazeto-Barry2012"><br>
</cite></span></div>
<div>Best --Pedro</div>
<div><span><cite id="m_-7683660125721866156CITEREFRazeto-Barry2012"><br>
</cite></span></div>
<div>El 14/12/2025 a las 11:59,
<a href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch" target="_blank">joe.brenner@bluewin.ch</a> escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,helvetica,sans-serif">
<div> <span lang="EN-US">The recognition that “autopoiesis” is
not some kind of monolithic, spontaneous, <em>sui generis</em>
process has been long in coming. For me, it is at best an
appearance-reality duality, without explanatory power.</span>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div> <span lang="EN-US">If one agrees that “autopoiesis” does
not operate like an on-off switch, then there must be some
intermediate stages or structures, as well as some movement
between them. The “auto-“ is then clearly a misnomer but let
us go on. It is these details of real processes that is, of
any real change for which Stéphane Lupasco proposed a
movement between primarily actual to primarily potential and
<em>vice versa</em>, alternately and reciprocally. This
sinusoidal view of process is certainly to be found
elsewhere, at least in “potential” form, but Lupasco
deserves the historical credit for having formulated it.
Identities – “my theory” – thus appear for what they are,
idealizations cut off from their opposites or, in reality,
not contradictions but counteractions. <em>Pace </em>Steve,
one must be able to deal with <em>discontinuous </em>exchange,
as well a continuous. </span> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> <span lang="EN-US">There is still no accepted “language”
in which to express these principles. I have tried, of
course, a language of energy, following Lupasco. Modern,
post-Bertalanffy systems theory comes perhaps close, as does
Steve’s Autopoietic Ecology, since it recognizes the
limitations of static formulations of the dynamic real
world,<em> including </em>its domains that are binary to
all intentas and purposes.</span> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I hope a renewed dialogue is possible, without recourse to
the “baby” diagrams of Peirce and Wittgenstein </div>
<div style="font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,helvetica,sans-serif"> </div>
<div>Thanks and best,</div>
<div style="font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,helvetica,sans-serif">Joseph</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Le 13.12.2025 20:10 CET, Steve Watson
<a href="mailto:sw10014@cam.ac.uk" target="_blank"><sw10014@cam.ac.uk></a> a écrit :</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,-apple-system,HelveticaNeue,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Dear
Lou, dear colleagues,</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Thank
you for posting the 1974 Varela, Maturana, and Uribe paper —
it is extremely helpful to have the discussion re-anchored
in the original formulation.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">I
fully agree with the point you emphasise: autopoietic
systems are not materially or energetically closed. They
exist only through continuous exchange with their
environment, while preserving an organisational invariance
across that exchange. The simple protocell model in the
paper remains one of the clearest demonstrations of this
idea.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">This
is also the sense in which I use expressions such as O ≈
F(O): not as a claim about self-containment, energetic
closure, or perpetual motion, but as a shorthand for
organisational persistence across transformation. I should
probably make that explicit more often, as the notation
clearly invites misreadings.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">For
avoidance of doubt, Autopoietic Ecology does not treat
autopoiesis as a universal or exclusive explanatory
principle. It treats it as one type of organisational
dynamic that becomes interesting precisely when systems are
open, fragile, metabolically dependent, and capable of
breakdown as well as persistence. The ecological emphasis is
meant to foreground coupling, constraint, and reorganisation
rather than purity or closure.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">I
appreciate your reminder of how carefully these distinctions
were drawn in the original work. It helps keep the
discussion focused on what autopoiesis was actually intended
to say — and what later extensions should remain accountable
to.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> </div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Warm
regards,</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_MSFontService,-apple-system,Roboto,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Steve</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-7683660125721866156ms-outlook-mobile-signature" style="font-family:Aptos,-apple-system,HelveticaNeue,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
Sent from <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/o0ukef__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RkQN2OV63tPC5SkQehKl68utm5y4RNCuvAzahTMs7Guc-nNsFbJ1xenO8zci4NCEraNL98_xj7uBmedwO4jb$" target="_blank">Outlook for iOS</a> </div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_-7683660125721866156divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"> <span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><strong>From:</strong>
Fis <a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es" target="_blank"><fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es></a> on behalf of Louis
Kauffman <a href="mailto:loukau@gmail.com" target="_blank"><loukau@gmail.com></a> <br>
<strong>Sent:</strong> Saturday, December 13, 2025 5:43:58
PM <br>
<strong>To:</strong> Pedro C. Marijuán
<a href="mailto:pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com" target="_blank"><pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com></a> <br>
<strong>Cc:</strong> <a href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es" target="_blank">fis@listas.unizar.es</a>
<a href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es" target="_blank"><fis@listas.unizar.es></a> <br>
<strong>Subject:</strong> Re: [Fis] Current
remarks/Autopoiesis</span>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"> It is still worth while to read the original
paper by Maturana, Varela and Uribe.
<div> <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://monoskop.org/images/d/dd/Varela_Maturana_Uribe_1974_Autopoiesis.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WyWMlWnFm0o4ncLeSN2bah-w8NstuK2jGIYI4dDC6K3eiM--0f70muEN4SkRLS50fLMhSd0qnVj-BUy1$" target="_blank">https://monoskop.org/images/d/dd/Varela_Maturana_Uribe_1974_Autopoiesis.pdf</a>
</div>
<div>Here is a link to that paper.</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"> On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at
3:16 PM Pedro C. Marijuán <<a href="mailto:pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com" target="_blank">pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com</a>>
wrote: </div>
<blockquote>
<div>
<div>Dear List,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>When I hear on autopiesis, my impression is that
many people continue to be blindly tied to a
conceptualization, interesting in its origins and
counterpoise to then dominant reductionist stances,
but inconsequential with its biological-cellular
grounding --even in that very time, but even more in
our times. I argued past months on the AP weakness
regarding apoptosis & protein degradation, many
genes rarely expressed along the life cycle, openness
to obtain foreign dna from the environment, plasmids
& phages uptake, horizontal gene transmission,
multiple generation of gene novelties, sex &
recombinations, etc. About information in AP,
"signaling" is not accepted as such, but as
"structural coupling with the niche" (so, nothing
about an external information flow or the like). About
the obvious need of, say, an energy flow there is no
realization that a previous sensing of ALL those items
is needed. The revolution in prokaryotic signaling
brought by the discovery of "One Component Systems"
(in the hundreds in each bacteria) in last two decades
clarify that point--how the external substances are
first "tasted" and later introjected. The interception
of an information flow best adapted to the ongoing
life cycle is continuously made. So, the living cell
is just "informational": in its self-production, in
its relationship with the environment, and in its
generation of multi-cell complexity.</div>
<div>To be continued one of these days.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div>--Pedro</div>
<div> </div>
<div> . El 10/12/2025 a las 23:08, Krassimir Markov
escribió:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Dear Steve,</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">I respect your opinion and
understanding of the world through AE, but still
there are some reasonable scientific boundaries
that should not be crossed. Here is a small
example. </span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Air existed before we were
born and, I hope, if there is no destructive war
instigated by russia, it will continue to exist
after our death. At the same time, without air
we cannot live, i.e. we are an open system that
constantly exchanges resources with the
environment. In other words, living organisms
are not autopoietic systems. To convince
yourself of this statement, just stop breathing.
The conviction in the truth of the statement
will come to you only after a minute or two and
you will probably accept that your operator
should be written</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">O=F(O, Input, Output).</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">I am writing this in
connection with your statement that "Material
processes and interpretive activity are not
alternatives; they are two sides of the same
ecological dynamic. Neither can be shown to
precede the other.” which I cannot accept as
true.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Just as there are no
closed autopoietic systems, so there is no
reality that cannot exist without
interpretation.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">The ecological dynamic you
are talking about is a mental structure and, of
course, in it properly the mental structures
that reflect the material processes and the
mental structures that interpret them are
dialectically connected in consciousness, and
yes - they are two sides of a common mental
structure, if we can even talk about sides in
mental structures.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black"> </span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Dear Eric,</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">I completely agree with
your thoughts. Indeed, the study of the
processes of interaction between people is very
important and has great significance.
Unfortunately, my impression is that most
researchers adhere to the deeply erroneous and
inapplicable to humans Shannon's paradigm.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Yes, the theory of signal
transmission is wonderfully applied in technical
data transmission systems, where the basic
principle is "copy/paste". In other words, the
image that is formed in the recipient's memory
completely (100%!!!) coincides with the image in
the sender's memory. Any deviation is considered
an error and requires re-sending the data, as
well as the application of error-resistant codes
during transmission.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">In humans, this is
absolutely impossible and inapplicable.
"Copy/paste" cannot happen due to the nature of
the interaction between people, which is at the
level of meaning, and not at the level of
signals (reflections). The sender (a person or
group of people) externalizes their mental
structures (for example, this letter), and the
recipient reflects what they have received and
gives it their own meaning. It is impossible in
this process to obtain an exact copy of the
image from the source's memory in the receiver's
memory. Therefore, it is correct to speak of
"information interaction" in people, and of
"communication" in technical systems. I am
attaching a slide from my lecture at the IS4SI
2025 Summit, which contains the brilliant
thought of the Bulgarian poet Pencho Slaveykov,
expressed more than a century ago.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black"> </span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">With respect,</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black">Krassimir</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""><span style="color:black"> </span></p>
<img alt="image.png" width="436" height="245">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,"sans-serif""> </p>
</div>
<div id="m_-7683660125721866156x_m_3542195860128630939DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"> <br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid rgb(211,212,222)">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QTuKkbEq3o-edqcFbLUT6Fj6mBkdCrLywyifmxx0aOnY7XGPCXlscdrBh4P_vF2wg7E_72E8WBjjtvbtkLc$" rel="noopener" target="_blank"><img style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" alt="" width="46" height="29"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:rgb(65,66,78);font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free.<a style="color:rgb(68,83,234)" href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QTuKkbEq3o-edqcFbLUT6Fj6mBkdCrLywyifmxx0aOnY7XGPCXlscdrBh4P_vF2wg7E_72E8WBjjtvbtkLc$" rel="noopener" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis" rel="noopener" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a>
----------
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: <a href="https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas</a>
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es</a>
----------
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
</div>
_______________________________________________ <br>
Fis mailing list <br>
<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a> <br>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis" rel="noopener" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a>
<br>
---------- <br>
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
<br>
<br>
Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de
correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza. <br>
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos
sus datos en el siguiente enlace: <a href="https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas" rel="noopener" target="_blank">
https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas</a>
<br>
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud.
puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el
momento en que lo desee. <br>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es</a>
<br>
---------- </blockquote>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________ <br>
Fis mailing list <br>
<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es" target="_blank">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a> <br>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a> <br>
---------- <br>
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL <br>
<br>
Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo
gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza. <br>
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus
datos en el siguiente enlace:
<a href="https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas" target="_blank">https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas</a>
<br>
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede
darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo
desee. <br>
<a href="http://listas.unizar.es" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es</a> <br>
---------- </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote></div>