date:20131015

[Fis] Praxotype

2013-10-15 Thread John Collier

This term might be useful in the context of the present discussion, especially 
in the contest of coordinated practice(s). Cognotype might also be useful. I 
think these might lead to a more fine-grained analysis of the more integrative 
sociotype.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/09/27/words-are-thinking-tools-praxotype/

___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Thanks John for alerting us to the terms praxotype and cognotyppe. I have a
simpler formula which I made use of in my book the Extended Mind: The Emergence
of Language, the Human Mind and Culture. Words are simply concepts and hence
thinking tools. Before verbal language hominids communicated by mimesis, i.e.
hand signals, facial gestures, body language and prosody (non-verbal
vocalization) like grunts. As the complexity of hominid existence increased
mimesis did not have the requisite variety for everyday life. Conceptualization
was needed. Verbal language emerged in which our words were our first concepts.
The word water, for example, was a concept that united all our percepts of the
water we drank, washed with, cooked with, fell as rain, or was found in rivers,
lakes or the sea. With language the brain which before was a percept engine
bifurcated into the human mind capable of conceptualization and hence planning
and large scale coordination. Verbal language allowed us to deal with matters
not immediately available in space and time. I claim that the emergence of
verbal language represented three simultaneous bifurcations: from mimetic
communication to verbal langauge; from the brain as a percept engine to the
mind capable of conceptualization and from hominids to fully human Homo Sapiens.

for more details visit
http://www.academia.edu/783502/The_extended_mind_understanding_language_and_thought_in_terms_of_complexity_and_chaos_theory

http://www.academia.edu/783504/The_extended_mind_The_emergence_of_language_the_human_mind_and_culture

cheers - Bob Logan

On 2013-10-15, at 2:54 AM, John Collier wrote:

This term might be useful in the context of the present discussion,
especially in the contest of coordinated practice(s). Cognotype might also be
useful. I think these might lead to a more fine-grained analysis of the more
integrative sociotype.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/09/27/words-are-thinking-tools-praxotype/

___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Robert K. Logan
Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD
Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto
http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan
www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan

___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

2013-10-15 Thread Karl Javorszky

Cointinuing Bob's discourse on language and words, the next step was done
by Wittgenstein, who said that as tokens, words can be represented by
numbers. This is a resurrecting of Pythagoras' statement, that Nature is
representable by natural numbers and their harmonies.
It is important to keep in mind that numbers have as many
interrelationships among each other as words - if not more. And, by the use
of computers, we can make their harmonies among each other visible to the
human. The inner poetry of words that is behind the words themselves, can
be found in the relations among the natural numbers.
Karl

2013/10/15 Bob Logan lo...@physics.utoronto.ca

Thanks John for alerting us to the terms praxotype and cognotyppe. I have
a simpler formula which I made use of in my book the Extended Mind: The
Emergence of Language, the Human Mind and Culture. Words are simply
concepts and hence thinking tools. Before verbal language hominids
communicated by mimesis, i.e. hand signals, facial gestures, body language
and prosody (non-verbal vocalization) like grunts. As the complexity of
hominid existence increased mimesis did not have the requisite variety for
everyday life. Conceptualization was needed. Verbal language emerged in
which our words were our first concepts. The word water, for example, was a
concept that united all our percepts of the water we drank, washed with,
cooked with, fell as rain, or was found in rivers, lakes or the sea. With
language the brain which before was a percept engine bifurcated into the
human mind capable of conceptualization and hence planning and large scale
coordination. Verbal language allowed us to deal with matters not
immediately available in space and time. I claim that the emergence of
verbal language represented three simultaneous bifurcations: from mimetic
communication to verbal langauge; from the brain as a percept engine to the
mind capable of conceptualization and from hominids to fully human Homo
Sapiens.

for more details visit

http://www.academia.edu/783502/The_extended_mind_understanding_language_and_thought_in_terms_of_complexity_and_chaos_theory

http://www.academia.edu/783504/The_extended_mind_The_emergence_of_language_the_human_mind_and_culture

cheers - Bob Logan

On 2013-10-15, at 2:54 AM, John Collier wrote:

This term might be useful in the context of the present discussion,
especially in the contest of coordinated practice(s). Cognotype might also
be useful. I think these might lead to a more fine-grained analysis of the
more integrative sociotype.
** **

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/09/27/words-are-thinking-tools-praxotype/

** **
___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Robert K. Logan
Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD
Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto
http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan
www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan

___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

2013-10-15 Thread Stanley N Salthe

Kark, all -- I have question about this numbers -- words concept. For
users of a given language much an be communicated by connotation as well as
denotation. It seems to me that the matching of numbers to words would not
encompass this -- would it? As well, what about synonyms with slightly
diifferent meanings?

STAN

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Karl Javorszky karl.javors...@gmail.comwrote:

2013/10/15 Bob Logan lo...@physics.utoronto.ca

Thanks John for alerting us to the terms praxotype and cognotyppe. I have
a simpler formula which I made use of in my book the Extended Mind: The
Emergence of Language, the Human Mind and Culture. Words are simply
concepts and hence thinking tools. Before verbal language hominids
communicated by mimesis, i.e. hand signals, facial gestures, body language
and prosody (non-verbal vocalization) like grunts. As the complexity of
hominid existence increased mimesis did not have the requisite variety for
everyday life. Conceptualization was needed. Verbal language emerged in
which our words were our first concepts. The word water, for example, was a
concept that united all our percepts of the water we drank, washed with,
cooked with, fell as rain, or was found in rivers, lakes or the sea. With
language the brain which before was a percept engine bifurcated into the
human mind capable of conceptualization and hence planning and large scale
coordination. Verbal language allowed us to deal with matters not
immediately available in space and time. I claim that the emergence of
verbal language represented three simultaneous bifurcations: from mimetic
communication to verbal langauge; from the brain as a percept engine to the
mind capable of conceptualization and from hominids to fully human Homo
Sapiens.

for more details visit

http://www.academia.edu/783502/The_extended_mind_understanding_language_and_thought_in_terms_of_complexity_and_chaos_theory

http://www.academia.edu/783504/The_extended_mind_The_emergence_of_language_the_human_mind_and_culture

cheers - Bob Logan

On 2013-10-15, at 2:54 AM, John Collier wrote:

This term might be useful in the context of the present discussion,
especially in the contest of coordinated practice(s). Cognotype might also
be useful. I think these might lead to a more fine-grained analysis of the
more integrative sociotype.
** **

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/09/27/words-are-thinking-tools-praxotype/

** **
___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Robert K. Logan
Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD
Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto
http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan
www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan

___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

2013-10-15 Thread Krassimir Markov

Dear FIS colleagues,

Sorry to double a part of this text for some of you but the SPAM filter of
FIS server stopped my first letter.

It is good for me because now I have second “first” attempt for this week
in FIS mailing list.


About words and numbers:

Numbers are invented to make possible the abstraction from real word and,
of course, from names of things from real word.

NUMBERS ARE NAMES of abstract entities.

One may make abstraction from reality to numbers and vice versa – to
concretize some numbers to real entitles.
In every case he/she may found some regularity.
This game has no limits.

The main question is “what is usefulness of the results from the game?”.

In many cases, this question is without answer.

But what about “numbering” and “numerology” ?

Mapping words to numbers has no rational meaning for humans because
numerology is not science but mystic approach for influence over non
educated humans. I am specialist in numerology and immediatelly will ask
Why we use decimal system in this science, why not any other - binary,
hexadecimal, Roman numerals, etc. :-)

In the same time, mapping letters, words, and phrases to numbers
(numbering) permit us to realize (new type) computer systems which model
human brain memory.
Two weeks ago I speak about this at NIT 2013 Int. Conference in Madrid.
This approach we call “Natural Language Addressing”.
It solves some difficult problems with so called “big data”.


Abouit Praxotype:

Every scientific research needs concepts to be used in corresponded theory.

New concepts are useful if they could not be replaced by any other single
concept.

Because of this, proposing new concepts, they have to be accomplished with
a survey of known similar concepts already used in the same or other
scientific areas. I need such survey for Praxotype and Cognotype.

FIS is right place to provide such work and to propose common concepts and
definitions for Information Science.

Friendly regards
Krassimir

P.S. I apologize to all who assume concept “usefulness” as a forbidden one
:-)




From: Karl Javorszky
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 6:23 PM
To: Stanley N Salthe
Cc: fis
Subject: Re: [Fis] Praxotype

As Bob said experiences - words. Wittgenstein said words - numbers.
Pythagoras: world - numbers. Idea: organise numbers like you organise
words and see the world.

Question from Stan: experience - number ?.

Answer:

Like in Bobs analogy: water as a recognisable, recurring experience,
sufficiently interpersonal to be consistently named and understood that
this is what was meant by water. In our case, we have to communicate
recognisable, recurring expriences that relate to mental products that are
thought. The brain experiences by the sensory organs differently than by
thinking. Feelings that arise on thoughts, rather than on sensual
experiences, can also be circumscribed. This will happen in an abstract
way. The audience is invited to recognise a pattern of patterns.  These
can be communicated by ponting to a table and saying such is the place
here and then, these statements being numbers. One may want to be
perceptive to the experience that a point in space and a load on this
point can be directly read out of the natural numbers. We are presently
learning the common, unifying experience that a table - slightly more
complicated than a multiplication table - delivers exact data on what is
where and when. Therefrom, one will be accessing a logical experience of
order. Like the physiological experience water has got a common name,
the cultural invention is now to give the name order to a way of reading
the contents of a table that makes the concept explicable to all.

This is the stage we are at now.

As to the sufficient number of noumena - see Gordana - as compared to that
of words used by traditional languages: we are at learning to give names
to experiences, and the experiences themselves are not yet universally
connected to such an interpretation of numbers which allows saying this
experience is commonly shared and is called, e.g., 'order', or 'future'
or 'space-mass-time stitch-up by standard place changes'.

There is by far enough of numbers to represent all that could have ever
been said. In fact one needs rather only a few of the numbers. It is
mostly combinatorics, and Nature makes do with 3 places and 4 markers to
convey the message. One can simulate genetics in a crude way by using
twice 16 elements. Their relations are very intricate. They deserve a
closer look. There, one can experience that feeling of order about which a
rational dialogue is possible.


Bruno: non-computability is true

The physical facts must lie within the nature of the numbers. The
perception by the human is where the information is added: aha, this
relation means that such-and-such will be that way. The content is in the
numbers, and is not computational. It is indeed us that have to understand
the movement of the elements by applying to the set of beliefs that are
based on a+b=c the idea

[Fis] Praxotype

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

5 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information