Hi Gary S, Gary R, lists, A thought just occurred to me that there may be a connection between the beauty of Mona Lisa (holism) and the various chemical pigments (reductionism) that constitute it -- namely, the organization of matter at two distinct scales, one at the macroscopic scale and the other at the microscopic.
That is, what makes Mona Lisa beautiful is the way macroscopic pigment particles are ORGANIZED on its canvas, while what makes the pigment particles look colorful in Mona Lisa is the way microscopic particles known as atoms are ORGANIZED inside each pigment molecule. If this analysis is right, the concept of ORGANIZATION may be of fundamental significance at all physical scales and the consequence (or function or meaning) of organization may depend on the physical scales involved. In the case of Mona Lisa, the pigment ORGANIZATION on the canvas results in beautiful visual sensations while the atomic ORGANIZATIONs in pigment molecules result in desirable colors of individual pigments. Hence, I am tempted to conclude that "Organization is the FUNCTOR connecting the beautiful aesthetics of Mona Lisa on the macrolevel and the colorful chemistry underlying it on the microlevel." All the best. Sung On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Sungchul Ji <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Gary S, Gary R, lists, > > I agree that certain aspects (e.g., qualia) of Peircean semiosis cannot > be reduced to mechanical terms, because life is more COMPLEX than physics > or chemistry. But I believe that no semiosis is possible without physics > and chemistry either, since, although the beauty of Mona Lisa is beyond the > chemical reductionism, no Mona Lisa can exist without colored dye molecules > having the right atomic organizations. So the challenging question may be: > > "When does beauty begin and chemistry end in Mona Lisa?" > > One possible answer that comes to mind would be: > > "Mona Lisa is the complementary union of anesthetics and physics." > > All the best. > > Sung > > > > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Gary Shank <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is this in addition to your ongoing errors of trying to portray Peircean >> semiotics in reductionist and mechanical terms? >> All the best, >> >> Gary >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 24, 2015, at 6:00 PM, Sungchul Ji <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Gary, list, >> >> There is a minor error in Slide 23: >> >> R should be associated with quali, sin, and legi, and >> >> O should be associated with icon, index and symbol. >> >> All the best. >> >> Sung >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Gary Richmond <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> List, >>> >>> Cary Campbell of the Semiotic Research Group posted this summary of a >>> lecture, "Anticipation and Semiotics: One Cannot Not Interact" and >>> gives a link to the accompanying ppt slideshow by Mihai Nadin (he >>> inadvertently misspells his first name as 'Mihou') on that group's Facebook >>> page. >>> >>> Many years ago I read a number of Nadin's papers and had a fascinating >>> off-list discussion with him on his work, then focusing squarely on >>> Peirce's semiotic theory and, as I recall, especially Peirce's >>> understanding of virtuality. While Nadin has gone on to consider >>> applications of semiotic theory to computer science, HCI, and other fields, >>> it appears that his work continues to be 'grounded' in Peircean semiotics. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> >>> Cary wrote: >>> >>> This is a super topical lecture from engineer/scientist/semiotician >>> Mihou Nadin; quite inspiring. >>> >>> He talks about man’s current and developing relations with technology >>> and how these relationships are slowly automating the human away; in which >>> the emphasis has shifted, since his pioneering work in interfaces and AI, >>> from making machines more like humans to making humans more like machines. >>> >>> This leads him to assert that the dynamism and complexity of life (Godel >>> defines complexity as the ability to interact) is not reducible to the >>> machine. Or in other words, signs (in the Peircean understanding that >>> always open up something new to an interpreter) are not reducible to >>> signals, which carry preformed and static data. Naturally, this calls for >>> him to explore Peircian interpretative semiotics. >>> >>> Here is also a pdf of his presentation to accompany the video: >>> http://www.nadin.ws/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/tartu_presentation.pdf >>> <http://l.facebook.com/l/VAQGMDKVvAQGJ132n81efy1uUwZdfD1Jrw_TeQ0Vj6Gc8lA/www.uttv.ee/naita?id=22396> >>> [image: Gary Richmond] >>> >>> *Gary Richmond* >>> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* >>> *Communication Studies* >>> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* >>> *C 745* >>> *718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>* >>> >>> >>> ----------------------------- >>> 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 . >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sungchul Ji, Ph.D. >> >> Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology >> Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology >> Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy >> Rutgers University >> Piscataway, N.J. 08855 >> 732-445-4701 >> >> www.conformon.net >> >> > > > -- > Sungchul Ji, Ph.D. > > Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology > Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology > Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy > Rutgers University > Piscataway, N.J. 08855 > 732-445-4701 > > www.conformon.net > -- Sungchul Ji, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy Rutgers University Piscataway, N.J. 08855 732-445-4701 www.conformon.net
----------------------------- 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 .
