Despite my reputation for doing otherwise, I don't *intend* to splatter
this already splattered thread, but I can't help observing that from
what little biosemiotics I am familiar with, it seems like what we are
hashing significantly overlaps their core tenets.

From Biosemiotics (Hoffmeyer, von Uexkull):

    “[i]n a world where nothing was predictable, Life would be out of a
job” (Hoffmeyer, Signs 28).

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Signs_of_Meaning_in_the_Universe/L5nSVthCFzUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22on+nature%27s+tendency+to+acquire+habits%22&pg=PA24&printsec=frontcover

    "Meaning is the guiding star that biology must follow. The rule of
    causality is a poor guide: causal relationships deal only with
    antecedents and consequences, thereby completely concealing from us
    broad biological interrelationships and interactions11 (Meaning 43)."

https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/viewFile/30210/21688#:~:text=In%20the%20relation%20between%20the,star%20that%20biology%20must%20follow.

My summary of the issues is roughly that what makes "life" unique from
all other forms/organizations of matter is the *apparent* ability/goal
of sensing/predicting/acting.  

- Steve



On 6/17/20 12:29 PM, ∄ uǝlƃ wrote:
> Yes! That's an excellent example of when faith is useful. I've argued that 
> that particular usage isn't canonical, though. The canon I learned was that 
> faith is a truncation of inference useful in many types of circumstance. In 
> the end, it boils down to let's just get on with it and see what happens ... 
> as opposed to hand-wringing and worrying - analysis paralysis. I also think 
> it plays an important role in hypothesis formation. E.g. if we take physics 
> *seriously*, there must be some thing, XYZ, that plays the role of a magnetic 
> monopole. Such "taking seriously" is an act of (revocable) faith. I.e. you 
> don't have to stop the presses and derive everything from first principles 
> ever day all day, arguing about fundamental concepts ... you just get on with 
> it and see what happens. Relatedly, the "shut up and calculate" accusation is 
> really a strawman. Everyone *wants* to go deeper. But many of us have jobs, 
> and grass to mow, and children to raise, etc. We can't spend all our time 
> thinking about the One True Meaning of "free will".
>
>
> On 6/17/20 11:09 AM, Gary Schiltz wrote:
>> Maybe this has a lot to do with why people have "faith", they just get tired 
>> of trying to figure it all out, and it is so much easier to accept what a 
>> large group of your peers tells you. I think true wisdom starts when one 
>> realizes those limitations.
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Reply via email to