<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><font size="4">Dear Pedro,</font><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Back to art. I find your work on the sociotype. which rests on the idea of limited resources of the brain especially interesting, because I cannot bring myself to think of information separately from the resources that are required to produce information. That is how my brain is put together. This makes it axiomatic for me to regard information as information with value. I have to use information theory like everyone else, but it is a rather blunt instrument, and it is difficult to integrate information theory with the notion of resources, other thermodynamical and quantum resources. It helps little with contemplating life and the human domain as well as art.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">I think of living organisms as self-regulating to occupy a range of states, but in a way that ensures that the range of possibilities is kept large enough. In this view, the organism actually uses its vital resources to resist its existence from becoming too constrained. It is clear that this has adaptive value, but I imagine that conservation of possibility is mathemartically baked into the dynamics of life at all levels. On the other hand, it seem obvious to me that the corollary is that the organism is also sensitive to its degree of being constrained at all levels of existence.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Friston's fashionable Free Energy Principle (FEP) focuses on narrowing thermodynamic- and organismic functioning as an extremizing principle. I think that this is probably wrong. I hypothesize that organisms, including humans, avoid extremizing to the death. Optimization and extremization seem to me like some kind of academic disease. I believe that life and mind avoid extremes and optima. Indeterminacy and ignorance seem ontologically foundational to me. I study this in the context of complex dynamical systems.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Art then becomes an activity, which occurs in the space kept open (at all cost) consistent with this axiom of keeping life and mind from optimizing and extremixing itself into an “ academic state.” Art becomes a manifestation of the necessity of life and mind to perpetually support the contraditction of convergence (confluence) and divergence (discord). No wonder art is so incredibly powerful and so crucially important to the collective. </font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">A testament to this is that even the worst antiliberal collectivist movements of the 20th century (and at the present moment in academia) leave Westen classical music and high art intact from being labeled as “ liberal” or “ white” or “ straight” or “ male.” Mathematics is not faring as well though. It is being regarded as racist in American academia, but mathematics is not exactly a fan of the messy good stuff of life and mind, is it?</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Mathematics obviously loves equality, like the collectivists do. I was equalized a lot during my education, by pedagogical authority. The technique used on me was that of wrong accusations and immediate punishment for plagiarism, without due process. Not just due process, but without any process at all. It happened once after an exceptional feat in mathematics and twice after exceptional feats in artistic work. I did not meet my teacher’s expectations, which were low, and the three teachers involved apparently could not handle the cognitive dissonance of being wrong about my potential. The punishments were extremely brutal and, as a highly sensitive person (HSP), I did not have psychological resources to avoid PTSD, which still remains with me to this day. I understand Carl Jung who, still in his eighties, thought about murdering his thesis advisor, who had wrongly accused him of plagiarism.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Meeting the high- or low expectations of authority is a kind of extremizing. I did not know how to do that as a kid. Nobody set me aside and taught me the virtues of brown-nosing and how to stay safe from teachers, in general. I was just naturally oscillating between indifference and excellence - like organisms do naturally. That naturalness turned into a personal spiritual calamity. A more artistic and natural approach to education would be to treat everybody indifferently, without expectations.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">There are as many cliche’s about art and life as there are songs about the greatness of collectivisms, but history shows that the largest collectivist collective that can be sustained has about 100-200 individuals, as you know. Academics think of academia as a successful collective, but it is not. It does not feed itself. It is entirely parasitic. Nor does the collective of the Catholic Church feed itself. It is parasitic, too. Having said that, I remain silent about information collectives, where individuals suckle on the teat of capitalism, but participate in information collectives and their frequently toxic machinations, which can be traced through Critical Theory to Marx, Lenin and Stalin.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Participating in this mode of sociality is difficult for me spiritually, but Pedro you have challenged me to contribute. I warmly appreciate your commitment to freedom of speech in this forum and thank you. Every now and then someone in this community pops up to confront me in a seemingly equalizing mood, but I feel free to defend myself. That is golden!</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4">Thanks Pedro!</font></div><div><font size="4">Paul</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font><div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Jan 15, 2026, at 1:05 PM, Pedro C. Marijuán <pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>Re: [Fis] Art as human practice</title>
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Laszlo & FIS Colleagues,</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Let me continue the initial reaction to
the Kickoff text. As I was writing: "[arts] appear as an
'overflow' derived from two sources: the strong brain demands from
social groups involved in emerging linguistic practices, plus a
strange aesthetic impulse that i do not know how to qualify (and
perhaps has a deep biological significance)." </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I have been reflecting on different
approaches potentially connected with the above apparent
dichotomy: The Social Brain (Robin Dunbar) and the Sociotype works
of my research group. Then the "Trophic Theory" by Dale Purves
(late 80s, early 90s) making a partial bridge to the aesthetics
effects, finally Manfred Clynes and his "sentic forms" (an
Austrian musician, neuroscientist, inventor, socialite) where we
clearly find the link with emotions and art 'forms', and somehow
return to the social brain... Too much, too long. I will
encapsulate the basics. </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">1. Social Brain, about the relative
constancy of the number of acquaintances in our social-personal
networks. This number (aka as Dunbar's number, around 200 people
in modern humans), may be found in tribes, companies, army
organization, business... it generated a fashion in management
gurus a couple of decades ago --these ideas are very easy to find
in the literature. Evolutionarily and quite crucially, the number
of individual contacts, say the size of natural social groups in
humans, correlates with cortex size along the evo process of Homo.
Thus, larger social groups, tightly connected, demanded far more
extra cortex, particularly in relation with linguistic
practices.... Enter the "sociotype", making clear the crucial
correlation behind our social nature:
genotype--phenotype--sociotype. This concept also captures linguistic
practices, by showing a parallel with Dunbar's number, now
regarding how much talking time we devote to maintain the
different circles of the sociotype bonds (say, thinking in modern
societies: family, friends, colleagues, acquaintances). We need
those 3 - 4 hours of talking time, on average of course, depending
on situations and personalities. Loneliness otherwise becomes a
mental toxic (we made applied biomedical research on that) and
becomes a fundamental health risk factor. It is a growing problem
in today's young people hooked on screens... and in the elderly.
(Interesting works by Jorge Navarro, my former collaborator).</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">2. What does talking imply for our
brains? Dale Purves was fashionable a few decades ago: according
to his views, we could interpret that talking activities mobilize
trophic resources that maintain synaptic networks in good shape by
refreshing the supply and circulation of neuropeptides,
neuromodulators, neurohormones, etc. A good conversation leaves an
intense feeling of well being. But it may also be achieved by
exciting activities in matters of personal interest (eg, creating
art, watching art, participating in collective ceremonies). So, it
seems that something else is needed apart of the daily ration of
casual conversation. And in this respect the collective is of
enormous interest and importance for the individuals of our
species (Laszlo's main paper is great via the empirical works
showing the appreciation of the collective dimension in the arts).
Thereafter, your strong bonds of the sociotype --family, friends--
may grant you personal happiness, and the acquaintances may bring
you funny novelties, but inevitably an extra trophic is needed. It
has been always that way: from Greek recitals, drama and Olimpics,
to Roman Circus, to the enormous Entertainment industry of our
times, or the Tourism monster-destroyer of today, or the world
crazy on mass-sport spectacles. It is the unending quest for the
extra trophic! </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">3. And concluding with Clynes, he
catalogued the fundamental "sentic forms" related to basic
emotions (following Paul Ekman, more or less). You find these
'forms' in our voice emotional overtones, in the physical contacts
we make, in laughter superimposed melodies too (again, research
with Jorge Navarro), and in the structures of formal music...
Seemingly we have to express them 'all' --all the forms, all the
emotions-- a thing not easy to do in daily life, so he proposed an
expression method (and made a little business about it). Indeed he
proposed quite strong a connection of these sentic forms with the
art forms & contents, and the deep aesthetic impulse. I would
ad that emotions become an inner apprehension of the factors that
most affect our daily life, the advancement of our own lives in a
social niche, full of open-ended problems that easily overload our
thin cognitions and have to be channeled in adaptive ways.
Expressing them, at least partially via surrogates, looks good and
healthy, for the 'social brain' convenience. Nevertheless the
extra trophic, the 'overflow' of our brains, remains. It can be
fed in trivial surrogates, in brutal ones, or in more difficult
but more rewarding domains--which are called Arts most of them.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Enough. Hope the text can be followed
and makes some sense. </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Best regards,</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">--Pedro </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">El 15/01/2026 a las 10:27, OARF
escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:22B4E9B1-147F-494B-BA10-5E7511A44FAD@oarf.org">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Hi Mark, Marcus, Laszio, Kate and Fis Colleagues,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don’t know if the creation of art follows the same logic as
the logic of mathematics. I recall in university trying to
prove some difficult theorem will walking down the campus hill
back home, I would use fast backtracking form some start to the
finish (the theorem). By the time I. got down the hill I usually
had it. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In contrast, when I do art there is no backtracking only
spontaneous adaption to what is. I have a general idea of what
I want but the motor part takes over to execute. Not does
emotion necessarily play a role in the creative process other
than the fun of it. Similar to the fun of shooting a basketball
while jumping and turning high in the air and making a perfect
shot. Or the feel of the body and breathing the fresh air while
cross country skiing. The art of the physical! The very doing of
art is the deeper beauty. The end product is just that. Much
like sex but there nature can take over to produce its own art
and product. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>///Below is from a previous post on the same topic in another
thread:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I grew up with an artist, my mother who wanted to be a
sculptor but life had other plans for her. Surrounded by actual
art being done day by day by mother or my fathers love of wood
and carpentry and me doodling while bored in grade school and
later doing cartoons and later theoretical mathematical
cartoons.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As an adult at University I also viewed S.C. Kleene’s
Introduction to metamathematics as art. Or von Neumann’s
mathematical theory of games and his mathematical foundations of
quantum mechanics as art. There is a wonderful beauty in
abstract thought and especially in the personal process of
construction of new theoretical concepts much like my mother’s
actively painting an oil. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So art for me is tied to the emotional construction of it. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As for animals and art, my theory of communication and
cooperation also applies to animal communication. </div>
<div>For an early version see: <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.tark.org/proceedings/tark_mar7_88/p129-werner.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XHWQY6CdfW4Dr6-g1VLtgrCAfPILHe90MKVPjng6oDkL1Unq1h5LESbCQVi_BvGjbnV1VTTlAhHKr2mDnZug0Nc$" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.tark.org/proceedings/tark_mar7_88/p129-werner.pdf</a></div>
<div>I think animals are highly intelligent and have complex
communication systems with art being a form of communication
important in the cooperative ecology of sexual reproduction. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The social cooperation and communication theory links
information with value and intentional states. I see emotions as
a complex of intentions (strategic), action-abilities,
information and their evaluation. Art combines all these
themes. It is the bedrock of the formation of and what makes
society possible at all. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This relates to Artificial Social Intelligence <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07847__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XHWQY6CdfW4Dr6-g1VLtgrCAfPILHe90MKVPjng6oDkL1Unq1h5LESbCQVi_BvGjbnV1VTTlAhHKr2mDYTXT6Sc$" moz-do-not-send="true">https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07847</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now with AI we are at the doorstep of combining the abstract
with biological synthesis:</div>
<div>See my “AI-CAD-CRISPR Protocols to Crack the Cancer Code:
Reverse Engineer Multicellular Life and Design in silico Brains
with Natural Architectures” <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395391173_AI-CAD-CRISPR_Protocols_to_Crack_the_Cancer_Code_Reverse_Engineer_Multicellular_Life_and_Design_in_silico_Brains_with_Natural_Architectures__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XHWQY6CdfW4Dr6-g1VLtgrCAfPILHe90MKVPjng6oDkL1Unq1h5LESbCQVi_BvGjbnV1VTTlAhHKr2mDfCQ68-U$" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395391173_AI-CAD-CRISPR_Protocols_to_Crack_the_Cancer_Code_Reverse_Engineer_Multicellular_Life_and_Design_in_silico_Brains_with_Natural_Architectures</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What will be the role of Art in the Bio-AI world? </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Eric</div>
</blockquote>
<div><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">-------</span></div><p><br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>Fis mailing list<br>Fis@listas.unizar.es<br><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>----------<br>INFORMACI�N SOBRE PROTECCI�N DE DATOS DE CAR�CTER 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 informaci�n 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">https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas</a><br>Recuerde que si est� suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicaci�n en el momento en que lo desee.<br><a href="http://listas.unizar.es">http://listas.unizar.es</a><br>----------<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>