List: My opinions categorically reject the shallow proposition below which ignores the foundational logic.
The biological sciences focus on life itself. The scientific foundation of biological information is included under the notion of Foundation of Information Science. The adjectives "cognitive" and "computational" and "linguistic" do not influence the meaning the foundation of the science, they are merely descriptors of sub-aspects of the science or incomplete perspectives of biology. The post introduces the proposition that these three adjectives are not even modifiers of the meaning of biology, mere metaphors, each of which can carry a vast array of meanings. Personally, I am rather fond of elephants and find this slight of elephants, one of mother nature's greatest achievements, unwarranted. Cheers Jerry On Jun 19, 2015, at 7:52 PM, howlbl...@aol.com wrote: > re: cognitive biology vs computational biology. > > may i suggest that you add yet one more approach to the list: linguistic > biology. per the work of Guenther Witzany. also reflected in my book The > God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos Creates. > > each approach uses a helpful metaphor. no one approach sees the elephant in > its entirety. so please let us use all three. > > with oomph--howard > > ---------------------- > Howard Bloom > Howardbloom.net > Author of: The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of > History ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), > Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st > Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New Yorker), > The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism ("A tremendously > enjoyable book." James Fallows, National Correspondent, The Atlantic), > The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates("Bloom's argument will rock > your world." Barbara Ehrenreich), > How I Accidentally Started the Sixties (“Wow! Whew! Wild! Wonderful!” Timothy > Leary), and > The Mohammed Code (“A terrifying book…the best book I’ve read on Islam.” > David Swindle, PJ Media). > Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former Visiting > Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York University > Founder: International Paleopsychology Project. Founder: The Group Selection > Squad; Founder, Space Development Steering Committee. Board Member and Member > Of Board Of Governors, National Space Society. Founding Board Member: Epic of > Evolution Society. Founding Board Member, The Darwin Project. Founder: The > Big Bang Tango Media Lab. Member: New York Academy of Sciences, American > Association for the Advancement of Science, American Psychological Society, > Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, > International Society for Human Ethology. Scientific Advisory Board Member, > Lifeboat Foundation. Advisory Board Member, The Buffalo Film Festival. > Editorial board member, The Journal of Space Philosophy. > > In a message dated 6/19/2015 9:22:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > emanl....@gmail.com writes: > > > Dear Jerry, > > > > Thank you for responding to my post. > > Thank you very much for an attempt to read and to understand my Vienna > Symposium related publications. > > > > I apologize for a delay in my response – I was trying to read and to > understand your papers (“Algebraic Biology” and “Physical Foundations of > Organic Mathematics”). Unfortunately, I did not understand much of what you > are talking there (about biological computations). > > Never mind, it is my fault, not yours. To my shame, I often also do not > understand what other people on the forum are writing too. > > > > As to me, I think (and write) that the era of a computational approach to > science and nature studies is over and we are gradually replacing it with a > cognitive approach. (Computational biology, Computational ecology, > Computational neuroscience, Computational genomics, Computational chemistry, > Computational endocrinology, Computational intelligence, Computational > linguistics and so on are now being replaced with Cognitive biology, > Cognitive ecology, Cognitive neuroscience, Cognitive genomics, Cognitive > endocrinology, Cognitive intelligence, Cognitive linguistics, and even > Cognitive computing). > > > > By definition, computational approaches imply intensive data processing, > while Cognitive approaches imply dedicated information processing. What is > the difference? Unfortunately, FIS forum does not dwell on this issue. > > > > I was pleased to hear from Prof. Kun Wu (at his opening lecture in Vienna) > that “By means of the reformation, all scientific and philosophical domains > are facing an integrative trend of paradigm reform, which I name as > “informationalization of science”, (The quotation is from one of his > presentation slides). > > > > As you can see, my assertions are very close to what Prof. Kun Wu claims, but > far from what you (and other mainstream FIS contributors) obey and adhere to. > > > > I am a newcomer to FIS and I do not intend to preach in the others’ temple. > But Prof. Kun Wu is one of the founding fathers of the Philosophy of > Information. Therefore, it would be wise for you to be in an agreement with > his postulates. > > > > Best regards, > > Emanuel Diamant. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Jerry LR Chandler [mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@me.com] > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 8:42 PM > To: Emanuel Diamant > Subject: Re: [Fis] FIS newcomer > > > > Dear Emanuel: > > > > Thanks for posting your views on Research Gate. > > > > Interesting perspective, but... the essence of biology / biological > computation are empirical observations that are highly irregular in nature. > One must separate the concepts of structures from functions in the languages > of chemistry and biology. > > > > You may wish to look at the concepts of languages from your perspectives. > > > > Several of my online available papers will provide more substance for these > comments. > > > > Cheers > > > > jerry > > > > > > On Jun 15, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Emanuel Diamant wrote: > > > > > Dear FISlists, > > > > I am a newcomer to the FIS discussion table. The debate that is going on in > your list-exchange is very interesting to me, but frankly, for the most of > the time, I only guess about what you are talking – my vocabulary and my > notions of Information are quite different from yours. Nevertheless, I would > like to add my voice to the ongoing discourse – I would like to direct you to > my page on the Research Gate > (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Emanuel_Diamant) to see my uploads > from the last IS4IS Vienna Conference. Maybe you will find them interesting. > > > > Best regards, > > Emanuel Diamant. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis