Eric, an apology: I just misplaced a remark to this post of yours into my response to Eugen as a PS. Please forgive
John Mikes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Hawthorne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 3:03 AM Subject: Re:The difference between a human and a rock > How does a human differ in kind from a rock? > > -Well both are well modelled as being "slow processes" (i.e. localized > states and events) in spacetime. > - A process is a particular kind of "pattern of organization" of some > subregion of spacetime. > - We share being made of similar kinds of matter particles that stay > close to each other in spacetime for > some finite time period, and some finite spatial extent. > > Oh, but you said "how do we differ?" > > Well, a human roganism is a sub-unit of a longer-lived "species" pattern > within an "organic emergent system eco-system" > pattern. > A rock does not appear to have that much complexity of form and > autopoietic function. > > A rock is one of those kind of local spacetime patterns or systems that > "doesn't have much choice about how it is." > The laws of physics, and the nature of the rock's components and the > thermodynamics of its vicinity are such that it > pretty much collects into how it's going to be at some time, then is > physically constrained to stay just that way, > at macro scales anyhow, for a long period of time. Of course, being a > big physical process pattern subject to > the laws of thermodynamics, it is, actually, changing, and usually > dissipating (disorganizing), just very, very slowly. > > A human organism pattern is existing at a thermodynamic range > internally, and in a thermodynamic regime in its > environment, that allows for more "options". for how (and e.g. where) to > be (over short time scales.) Interestingly, > this makes for the presence of all kinds of other similar organic > patterns with options, and interesting behaviours > (like eating you for dinner, or infecting you and eating your cell > structure.) In other words, this thermodynamic > regime, and the particular kinds of atoms and chemical bonds in > ecosystems, make for active competition for > which should be the dominant pattern of organization of matter and > energy in the vicinity. i.e. You can't always > just be a rock, because there might be a creature with a hammer wanting > to break you down into cement. > Or you can't live for ever, as an organism, because something else wants > to re-pattern your matter and energy; > that is, the matter and energy your pattern has competed successfully to > borrow for its form for a while. > > Clear as oozing primordial subterranean sulphur-vent mud? > > Ok but here's the interesting part of the story. Because there are > "options for how to be i.e. how to hold together" > at our organic ecosystem thermodynamic regime, there is > "pattern-competition" for who is the most auto-poietic > (i.e. what forms of matter and energy collection can hold together best, > at the expense of others). > > And it turns out that life-like ecosystem patterns, species patterns, > and organism patterns win out for a time, > precisely because their main function is autopoiesis, and they > eventually, through natural selection, get very > good at it. > > And it may turn out that the way you survive best as a pattern in > spacetime, assuming you have a certain > thermodynamic range to work with, is to store inside yourself > INFORMATION about "that which is > outside yourself and nearby. i.e. about your environment. In otherwords, > pattern, if you want to live, get > out there and start RE-PRESENTING aspects of your environment WITHIN > YOURSELF (in some > partly abstract form within some aspect of your own form.) > Eventually, if you do that, simple representation > of your environment. "Ouch that hurt. I'm going to flail the other way > outa here." or > "hmmm, my complex molecules like the smell and molecular fit of YOUR > complex molecules" > will give way to complex representation within the organism of its > environment, and complex action plans > to be carried out to protect the organism (and its kin's) pattern from > nastier aspects of the environment. > So we get "Hmmm. I think that guy and his army is out to get me and > mine." "I think I will pre-emptively > strike on that other guy's country because he vaguely looks like the > first guy." Ok, bad example. > or you get "Hmmm. What an intelligent (accurate > environment-representer), capable (effective environment > modifier and pacifier), and beautiful (pattern-form-average-conformant) > woman she is. I'll ask her to marry me. > > Or something like that. > > And that's the major difference between humans and rocks. Our > thermodynamic regime necessitates that > we navigate options for our existence/non-existence as stable patterns > by representing informationally, then > navigating and affecting, our surrounding space, time, matter, and > energy forms. > > Eric > > > Hal Ruhl wrote: > > > Hi Stephen: > > > > Observers: > > > > In this venue dances interact and change each other discontinuously by > > mutual collision or by exchanging smaller dances. > > > > How then does a human differ in kind from a rock? Should we expect > > them to differ in kind? > > > > Yours > > > > Hal > >
