Cari Michel e cari tutti,
finalmente si comincia a capire che la legge fondamentale della vita,
esistenza e conoscenza, è INFORMAZIONE, inclusa la neg-entropia, non
l'entropia. Ciò si evince dalla mia ricerca scientifica da circa
quarant'anni: anche dai miei libri e contributi alla rete Fis, da quando ho
conosciuto ad Acireale (Catania) Pedro.
Un abbraccio augurale.
Francesco
2016-07-28 10:30 GMT+02:00 Michel Godron <migod...@wanadoo.fr>:
> my replies are in red
> Bien reçu votre message. MERCI. Cordialement. M. Godron
> Le 27/07/2016 à 13:23, Pedro C. Marijuan a écrit :
>
> Dear Joseph,
>
> I finally went through that video, in part stimulated by your critical
> comments. My impression, particularly at the beginning of the talk, was
> positive: that the fundamental physical reality might partake of a similar
> organization to life is quite congruent with the "informational" point of
> view.
>
> I quite agree, and the first chapter of *Ec**ologie et Evolution du
> monde vivant *explains why "Life is a transmission of information"
> including thermodynamical entropy.
>
> I was strongly reminded of Michael Conrad's: "When we look at a biological
> system we are looking at the face of the underlying physics of the
> universe." This was in Madrid 1994, at the foundational conference of FIS.
> Well, perhaps some aspects of the last part of that talk were not so well
> focused in my view, but at least always appeared open to argumentation if I
> properly interpret the style and the context. Does a not so well-solved
> part destroy a whole direction of thought? I think we must be open to the
> give and take, and contribute to salvage the best parts of interesting
> speculations (if that's the case here), even for our own intellectual
> interest. Couldn't our own common fis enterprise be toughly criticized in
> similar grounds? Just to conclude, I am reminded of one of the most famous
> short essays by philosopher Ortega y Gasset, it was about the "frame", just
> the frame of any painting ("Meditación del Marco" was the title in
> Spanish). Sholarship is able to create exciting reflections/discussions...
> on anything.
> So, addressed to all FIS colleagues, why we don't accept this new
> discussion challenge?
>
> I should be glad to participate !
> Could you tell me if another french scientist partipates to FIS ?
> M. Godron
>
>
> Friendly regards
> --Pedro
>
> El 13/07/2016 a las 19:15, Joseph Brenner escribió:
>
> Dear Pedro,
>
>
>
> Most of us would agree that standard Western science does not give a
> complete answer to questions about life and mind. As we try to seek better
> foundations in general and for information science in particular, we may be
> able to benefit from knowledge resources which have not been fully
> exploited, those of the 'Past' and those of the ‘East’. I myself have
> written a paper suggesting that a metalogical rejunction is possible in
> which logic recovers its original status as inclusive of all other
> disciplines. As Brian Josephson writes in the Abstract of one of his
> lectures, “Eastern mystics may have relevance to scientific understanding.”
> Fritjof Capra explored such parallels in his important 1967 book *The Tao
> of Physics.* However, many interpretations of what mysticism is are
> possible.
>
>
>
> There is a further major *caveat *to keep in mind: there are different
> ways of understanding “what is missing” in science (see Terence Deacon’s
> discussion of information) and what kind of additions could be made. On the
> one hand, we may legitimately associate quantum fluctuations with Indian
> (not Eastern) ideas of things continuously moving in and out of existence.
> On the other, as we have discussed in connection with Conrad’s ‘fluctuons’
> at least once in the FIS Group, it may NOT be correct to say that such
> fluctuations are or can carry meaningful information.
>
>
>
> Recent postings to the FIS list have been made by people associated with a
> project embedded in a major university (Cambridge, UK), the “Matter-Mind
> Unification Project”, now the “Theory of Condensed Matter Group” which
> Josephson has directed. This effort has sought and still seeks to
> incorporate doubtful, self-confirming forms of Western thought and
> activity. Personally, I do not wish to be associated with the Circular
> Theory of Ilexa Yardley, in which “the core dynamic is the conservation of
> a circle”, which is a misunderstanding of dynamics. I do not wish to accept
> nature as controlled by some “Master Algorithm”, any more than I
> do Peircean Thirdness. I do not wish to be associated with paranormal
> phenomena, cold fusion and observer created reality, all of which are part
> of Josephson’s project.
>
>
>
> A characteristic of this thought is its dogmatism of completeness, a
> theory of everything, in which things are linked by a “subtler dimension
> which we have identified with the Platonic realm” (Yardley). One might
> argue that the Tao is also a theory of everything that also sees things
> linked in a way different from that of, say, chemical bonds. The major
> difference is that understanding the Tao does not require abrogating
> science in order to replace it by a self-serving ideology. Deacon has
> characterized the ‘homunculi’ and ‘golems’, disguised as physical
> principles, that interfere with thought; ‘wishful thinking’ is the most
> charitable term that can be applied.
>
>
>
> Other FIS members may find these ideas harmless, perhaps even amusing. I
> consider them perversions of thought by people with an agenda of control.
> The one positive result of these postings has been to cause me to
> re-examine the assumptions in the logic of the included middle of Stéphane
> Lupasco. This as some of you know is the basis of my ‘Logic in Reality’ and
> its Principle of Dynamic Opposition (critical formulation by Lupasco *ca.
> *1951). I conclude that no new and doubtful physical concepts need to be
> introduced to address the essential aspects of life, mind and information.
> That information has ‘dual aspects’ has been more or less explicit in
> everything I have tried to write in the last eight years. But these
> concepts are not simple; one cannot use the principles of quantum mechanics
> directly. Hence I do not expect to find a large audience nor, to be frank,
> a large market. I simply hope they may deserve some more discussion on the
> FIS list.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Joseph
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> Pedro C. Marijuán
> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (&
> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing
> listFis@listas.unizar.eshttp://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
