Dear Lou,

thank you for your response.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Louis H Kauffman <> wrote:

> Dear Plamen,
> I suspect that what you would like to know about ‘distinction logic’ is
> how distinctions arise in natural systems.
> I would like to know more about this also!

I suspect Spencer-Brown has beeen working on this too.

> One can imagine that complex interactions can under appropriate
> circumstances lead to dynamic closed loops of interaction and even
> concomitant spatial distinctions (in the eye of an observer of the system).
> Such patterns would be the subject of a distinction logic or a logic of
> distinctions for that observer. There is the related question of how
> observers can arise but this is looped around with the first question. The
> two questions are linked with one another and one can imagine that systems
> that produce partly stable looping processes can begin to create naming and
> reference.

This sounds intriguing. Does not this go into biosemiotics?

> If they can do that, they will not be far from self-reference. Exactly how
> this could be done is a mystery. But that it happens is evident in the
> biological world.

So we come back to the old Searle thesis about self-reference?

> On the other hand you may be interested in the simplicities of the
> calculus of indications or variations of that. I would be happy to talk
> about that. When I do it is at the level of human observer and our mutual
> abilities to distinguish, agree and disagree.

I see. This is the level of the scientist.
This should be doable. Self-referential microbes are out of question for
the moment.



> Best,
> Lou
> On Mar 9, 2016, at 1:10 AM, Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov <
>> wrote:
> Dear Lou, Pedro and Colleagues,
> I think that Pedro made an interesting comment suggesting an extension of
> Lou’s original model that another sort of recursion can be injected from
> the outside world in terms of multiple nested loops of action. That the
> species (r)evolution was accelerated and “harmonized” via “cross-cultural”
> exchange of DNA segments invoked by viruses is a known fact now. It also
> changes to some extent the meaning of infection diseases from something
> “bad” to fight into a sort of necessary symbiosis for the co-evolution of
> the system Earth/Cosmos. So, it makes sense to think and ask whether by
> creating more and more artificial drugs and vaccines against infections we
> do not intervene in the mutation of viruses in a way that cannot be
> regarded as response-able, because of also being too reductionistic with
> respect to what are the consequences for both ourselves and the BIG unknown
> ecosystem outside our bodies. I am curious to know what do you think about
> the option to try integrating Turing Oracle Machines in such extended
> recursive models of living systems, which integrate viruses in the
> evolutionary loop. This idea was suggested in the course of our integral
> biomathics discussions in the past. In other words, what do you think about
> linking a formal biomathematical representation and a biocomputation
> responsive mechanism in maintaining an autonomous biologic? Perhaps we need
> multiple layers of abstraction, i.e. multiple  biologics, and not only the
> bimolecular and cellular ones. And also, do you think there are other
> mechanisms for information transfer, e.g. in prokaryotic cells and archaea,
> also addressing the principles of circularity and recursion?
> Another question I have is ignited from Pedro’s reflections upon your
> circularity model for reproduction and directed to both of you. If
> biological “clocks” such as the circadian rhythm are the result of an
> evolutionary impressed repetition of action, are they the carrier or the
> carried, or perhaps both, and if so how does this come into being? I recall
> a paper by Koichiro Matsuno in the former 2013 IB special issue “Making
> Biological Theory More Down to Earth” which said something interesting
> about the role of cycles in maintaining identity and life, also from the
> phenomenological perspective concerning the distinction between self and
> outer world. Here is where I’d like to learn more about the distinction
> logic like Pedro.
> Thank you.
> All the best.
> Plamen
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
Fis mailing list

Reply via email to