Yes, yes, Stan. However, the 'common information' is general rather than particular - and is still HELD within the spatiotemporal confines of the particular existential unit.
Imagine if there were no fish - then, there wouldn't even be any of this 'consensual' information, because although the consensual 'exists' as common-to-all - it requires the particular fish to both store and activate this 'consensual' information. And I will repeat - there is no such 'existential thing' as a collective. There IS collective information, which is always general, and which is held and activated within the particular. Edwina ----- Original Message ----- From: Stanley N Salthe To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:59 AM Subject: [biosemiotics:8134] Re: Abduction and Practopoiesis Edwina -- You wrote: ET: Perhaps I didn't write it correctly. Of course, the processing of information takes place within the individual; there is no such existential 'thing' as a 'collective'. S: As a hierarchy theorist, I am bound to object to this statement. An example that comes to mind is 'consensus' -- as opposed to 'voting'. Consider also social fads. As well of course, organisms are collectives of cells as well as being individuals of higher scale. We don't yet know enough about schools of fishes and flocks of birds. But perhaps I miss your meaning of "collective". STAN On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: Perhaps I didn't write it correctly. Of course, the processing of information takes place within the individual; there is no such existential 'thing' as a 'collective'. But, doesn't the knowledge base rest within the collective? For example, I did not, myself, make my computer. I rely on the knowledge base of the collective that it can provide me with this 'thing' that operates as a computer. I 'know' that some disease is caused by germs; I know it on a surface level (in words) because it is the knowledge of my community - but I do not 'know' it from any individual empirical evidence; I've never seen a germ. If I had to rely on my own small knowledge base, I'd be very limited in what I could do. But, relying on the massive storage and innovative capacities of the collective knowledge base - and knowledge producers - I can reap the benefits. I did not, myself, invent the airplane. But, relying on the innovative capacities of the collective of my species - I can make use of such a technological advance. That is, the human species, because it moved invention (abduction) out of the biological domain and into the 'imagination', into speculation, into anticipatory thought - this meant that the species as a whole could develop adaptive technology. And then, this new adaptation could be made use of by others - who had not had a thing to do with the development of this new adaptation! Edwina ----- Original Message ----- From: Danko Nikolic To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Edwina Taborsky ; [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 4:26 PM Subject: Re: [biosemiotics:8130] Abduction and Practopoiesis Dear Edwina, On 29/03/15 21:59, Edwina Taborsky wrote: Edwina: Does the massive storage of knowledge and the number of adaptive levels function within the individual - or is it instead the case that such a complex intelligence operates within a collective, within the 'community-of-knowers, so to speak - and no one person is required (or even has the ability) to develop novel adaptations on their own. It functions within individuals. For example, this is how we learn and a new fact or a new skill; when we learn something new, we change our ideatheca. Danko -- Prof. Dr. Danko Nikolić Web: http://www.danko-nikolic.com Mail address 1: Department of Neurophysiology Max Planck Institut for Brain Research Deutschordenstr. 46 60528 Frankfurt am Main GERMANY Mail address 2: Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies Wolfgang Goethe University Ruth-Moufang-Str. 1 60433 Frankfurt am Main GERMANY ---------------------------- Office: (..49-69) 96769-736 Lab: (..49-69) 96769-209 Fax: (..49-69) 96769-327 [email protected] ----------------------------
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
