Thanks Robert,
I agree with what you say about DNA, so I may be on the same slippery
path to catastrophic heterodoxy!
In responding to the question "what is information", started by Marcus,
I was pointing out what seemed to me to be a shifting definition of
'communication', and wondering if this corresponded to a shifting
definition of 'information'.
Loet stated that "the communication of words and sentences generates the
interhuman domain of communication". I am not taking issue with this. My
question is whether we are using the word 'communication' and 'generate'
in the same sense when we also say "the communication of molecules
generates a biology".
Your comments raise a related question. Perhaps it is not that molecules
generate biology, but rather it is that biology (in the shape of the
network of proteomic and enzymatic reactions) generates the
communication of molecules?
Perhaps the problem is one of keeping track of the system in focus, and
demarcating it clearly (as Stafford Beer might have argued at this
juncture).
Dai
On 20/05/15 16:05, Robert E. Ulanowicz wrote:
Dear Dai:
To say that molecules only interact directly is to ignore the metabolic
matrix that constitutes the actual agency in living systems. For example,
we read everywhere how DNA/RNA "directs" development, when the molecule
itself is a passive material cause. It is the network of proteomic and
enzymatic reactions that actually reads, interprets and edits the
primitive genome. Furthermore, the structure of that reaction complex
possesses measurable information (and complementary flexibility).
Life is not just molecules banging into one another. That's a physicist's
(Lucreatian) view of the world born of models that are rarefied,
homogeneous and (at most) weakly interacting. (Popper calls them vacuum
systems.) The irony is that that's not how the cosmos came at us! Vacuum
systems never appeared until way late in the evolution of the cosmos. So
the Lucreatian perspective is one of the worst ways to try to make sense
of life. We need to develop a perspective that parallels cosmic evolution,
not points in the opposite direction. To do so requires that we shift from
"objects moving according to universal laws" to "processes giving rise to
other processes" (and structures along the way).
The contrast is most vividly illustrated in reference to the origin of
life. Conventional metaphysics requires us to focus on molecules, whereby
the *belief* is that at some point the molecules will miraculously jump up
and start to live (like the vision of the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel). A
process-oriented scenario would consist of a spatially large cycle of
complementary processes (e.g., oxidation and reduction) that constitutes a
thermodynamic work cycle. Those processes then can give rise to and
support smaller cycles, which eventually develop into something resembling
metabolic systems. A far more consistent progression!
Of course, this view is considered catastrophically heterodox, so please
don't repeat it if you don't already have tenure. ;-)
Peace,
Bob U.
I see two distinct cases:
Case 1: For molecules 'communication' consists of interaction between
the molecules themselves, resulting in biology.
Similarly, for atoms 'communication' consists of interaction between the
atoms themselves. They bang into each other and exchange their components.
Case 2: For words and sentences (in my view of the world) it is human
beings who communicate, not words and sentences. From a Maturana
perspective, language is a recursive coordination between autopoietic
entities, not interaction between linguistic items.
In case 1, there is no mediating domain. Molecules and atoms interact
directly.
But in case 2, there is a hierarchy. Communication is between human
beings, but interaction is through words and sentences in a linguistic
domain. When I respond to your email, I do not have an effect on that
email. Rather, I hope to have an effect on your thought processes.
--
-----------------------------------------
Professor David (Dai) Griffiths
Professor of Educational Cybernetics
Institute for Educational Cybernetics (IEC)
The University of Bolton
http://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC
SKYPE: daigriffiths
UK Mobile: + 44 (0)7826917705
Spanish Mobile: + 34 687955912
email: dai.griffith...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
