To aid clarity: In the model I describe, a response to apprehension (“meaning”) is unconditional and independent of any observer. It is a function of the organism. These behaviors include the development of action potentials, many impossible for an external observer to see.
Regards, Steven > On Jun 21, 2015, at 2:53 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith <[email protected]> wrote: > > “use” is particularly ambiguous. So I do not think, as presented, that > “meaning” is “solved?” By which I assume you intended to say “what the term > ‘meaning’ is a reference to.” > > Indeed, all of these terms “social”, “habit”, “use” are ambiguous. > > I believe that the best we can do is to say that a “meaning” is exactly the > action (“behaviors,” “motions") that is the product of apprehension, where > apprehension is that which the organism takes from the world. This is not as > simple as saying “sign” in the Peircean sense, in that the “third” in > “apprehension” is an accumulative filter. > > Quiet simply there is no meaning except that which an organism displays in > response to the world. I may say that P typically responded like Y to X (in a > “Rosetta stone” sense), but I can never assert generally that X means Y. > > This view is closer to Charles Peirce than it is to L. Wittgenstein. Both > were confused by the binary system of Boole - a dualism - truth values must > be discarded if you are to speak rigorously. This is not to deny the utility > of truth value systems. > > In short, the universe does not care whether or not a thing is true or false, > this or that. Consistency is a human affair. > > Regards, > Steven > > > >> On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:55 PM, Günther Witzany <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Meaning is a social function (G.H.Mead). The meaning can be simply >> identifying by looking what habits it produces (C.S.Peirce), the meaning of >> a word is its use (late Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations). There >> remains no question about "meaning" so far. This problem is finally solved. >> >> Best >> Guenther >> Am 20.06.2015 um 22:33 schrieb Jerry LR Chandler: >> >>> 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, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> 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 <http://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, >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 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). >>>> <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265238674_Physical_Foundations_of_Organic_Mathematics_%28Abstract_August_26_2014%29> >>>> 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. >>>> <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265238674_Physical_Foundations_of_Organic_Mathematics_%28Abstract_August_26_2014%29> >>>> >>>> >>>> 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:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>] >>>> 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 >>>> <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 >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>>> <http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Fis mailing list >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>>> <http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Fis mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>> <http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis> >> >> <Unknown.jpeg> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fis mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >> <http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis> > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > [email protected] > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list [email protected] http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
