fascinating thinking, pedro. it triggers this: The stages of development are far more than real-world problem solvers. They set artificial challenges, then achieve them. Making a caterpillar that works is an enormously complex challenge. Making a working butterfly is also immensely more complex than any simple challenge mounted by the environment. Changing from caterpillar to butterfly in one lifetime is unachievable beyond all belief. And these grotesquely artificial goals can’t be accounted for by a simple goal of survival. The goal, if anything, seems to be to accomplish the ornate, the unnecessary, the flamboyant, and the impossible. How does a drive toward impossible flamboyance get built into life? How does it get built into the cosmos? with warmth and 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 ("Impressive, stimulating, and tremendously enjoyable."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 (“a monumental,epic, glorious literary achievement.” Timothy Leary), and The Muhammad Code: How a Desert Prophet Gave You ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram--or How Muhammad Invented Jihad ( “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, NewYork University Founder: International PaleopsychologyProject; founder and chair, Space Development Steering Committee; Founding Board Member: Epic of Evolution Society; Founding Board Member, The Darwin Project; Board Of Governors, National Space Society; 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.
In a message dated 2/9/2017 3:22:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es writes: Dear Marcus and Colleagues, Thanks for your interest. The Chengdu's Conference represented for me an occasion to return to my beginnings, in the 80's, when I prepared a PhD Thesis: "Natural Intelligence: On the evolution of biological information processing". It was mostly following a top down approach. But in some of the discussions outdoors of the conference (a suggestion for the next one in Shanghai: plenary discussion sessions should also be organized) I realized that biomolecular things have changed quite a lot. One could go nowadays the other way around: from the molecular-informational organization of cellular life, to intelligence of the cell's behavior withing the environment. The life cycle es essential. It provides the source of "meaning" (as I have often argued in discussions in the list) but it is also the reference for "intelligence". Communicating with the environment and self-producing by means of the environmental affordances have to be smoothly organized so that the stages of the life cycle may be advanced, and that the "problems" arising from the internal or the external may be adequately solved. It means signalling and self-modifying in front of the open-ended environmental problems, sensing and acting coherently... It strangely connects with the notion of human "story" and the communication cycle in the humanities. Relating intelligence to goal accomplishment or to an architecture of goals as usually done in computational realms implies that the real life course (or the surrogate) is reduced to a very narrow segment. True intelligence evaporates. These were some of my brute reflections that I have to keep musing around (I saw interesting repercussions for cellular signaling "narratives" too). Maybe this is also a good opportunity for other parties of that conference to expostulate their own impressions --very exciting presentations both from Chinese and Western colleagues there. Thanks again, --Pedro El 08/02/2017 a las 14:14, Marcus Abundis escribió: > In next weeks some further discussion might be started, but at the time being, the slot is empty (any ideas?)< Hi Pedro, For my part I would appreciate a chance to hear more about the thoughts you have been developing (even if they are very rough) as related to the talk you gave in China last summer. Alternatively, further thoughts on Gordana's talk would be nice to hear. For both of these talks, you both shared your presentation stack . . . but there was so much information in both of those talks, it would be nice to have some of "unpacked." Marcus _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list _Fis@listas.unizar.es_ (mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es) http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis -- ------------------------------------------------- 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 0 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) firstname.lastname@example.org_ (mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es) http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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