Dear LizR, Plain English explanations are the problem: they carry a set of ontological assumptions built it. Kauffman is challenging these assumptions and thus as to use a mixture of poetry and math to explain and elaborate the idea.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:35 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21 January 2014 17:51, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Dear LizR, >> >> Did the notion of an Eigenform, as defined, make sense to you? >> >> Heinz performs the magic trick of convincing us that the familiar objects >> of our >> existence can be seen to be nothing more than tokens for the behaviors of >> the organism >> that apparently create stable forms. These stabilities persist, for that >> organism, as an >> observing system. This is not to deny an underlying reality that is the >> source of >> objects, but rather to emphasize the role of process, and the role of the >> organism in the >> production of a living map, a map that is so sensitive that map and >> territory are >> conjoined. Von Foerster’s (1981a-d) book and papers were instrumental in >> pioneering >> the field of second-order cybernetics. >> The notion of an eigenform is inextricably linked with second-order >> cybernetics. >> One starts on the road to such a concept as soon as one begins to >> consider a pattern of >> patterns, the form of form or the cybernetics of cybernetics. Such >> concepts appear to >> close around upon themselves, and at the same time they lead outward. >> They suggest >> the possibility of transcending the boundaries of a system from a locus >> that might have >> been within the system until the circular concept is called into being. >> But then the >> boundaries have turned inside out, and the inside is the outside. >> Forms are created from the concatenation of operations upon themselves >> and objects >> are not objects at all, but rather indications of processes. Upon >> encountering an object as >> such a form of creation, you are compelled to ask: How is that object >> created? How is it >> designed? What do I do to produce it? What is the network of productions? >> Where is the >> home of that object? In what context does it exist? How am I involved in >> its creation? >> >> > The above hints at some sort of sense - it isn't something I could (quite) > dismiss as postmodern nonsense, for example - but I think I can safely > answer your question - "no, please resubmit in plain English!" > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- Kindest Regards, Stephen Paul King Senior Researcher Mobile: (864) 567-3099 [email protected] http://www.provensecure.us/ “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.” -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
