Re: [Fis] Neuroscience of art
Dear Lauri, You wrote: Laws should be independent of each other. Why? Who says so? Cheers, Joseph - Original Message - From: Lauri Gröhn To: fis@listas.unizar.es Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 11:50 AM Subject: Re: [Fis] Neuroscience of art Hi all, I am afraid that list can't be validated as a set laws. Laws should be independent of each other. Regards, Lauri Gröhn metacomposer www.synestesia.fi On 18.9.2008, at 18.30, Sonu Bhaskar wrote: The cognizance between the art and cognitive neuroscience has been relatively ignored in the scientific fraternity. The recent proposition regarding the ten laws of art, as Dr. V. S. Ramachandran puts it, has ignited a new debate among the philosophers and the neuroscientists about neural correlates of art in its different forms. Professor Ramachandran's suggested 10 universal laws of art: 1.. Peak shift 2.. Grouping 3.. Contrast 4.. Isolation 5.. Perception problem solving 6.. Symmetry 7.. Abhorrence of coincidence/generic viewpoint 8.. Repetition, rhythm and orderliness 9.. Balance 10.. Metaphor -- ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Information - Meaning - Knowledge
Robin, Wittgenstein’s “meaning as use” is mostly related to meaning of words and sentences. And analytic philosophy is not in favour of considering evolutionary approaches.As the systemic approach goes with a bottom-up perspective usable for simple organisms, I do not feel that it can be basically considered as a reformulation of W’s “meaning as use”. However, if we consider the application of the systemic approach to the case of human language precisely, then the generation of meaning by constraint satisfaction can be compared to W’s “meaning as use” assuming we know the corresponding constraints. And this brings us to another level of analysis: what are, for us humans, the constraints to be satisfied ?We have of course in the background all our biological constraints. But human specific constraints are not that well known (or ignorance about the nature of consciousness being a heavy contributor of the problem). On a general basis, we can say that a generic human constraint is the search of happiness which indeed conditions many of or meaning generations and actions. Various sub-constraints come from this generic one like combine pleasure reality, limit anxiety, satisfy Maslow pyramid, valorise ego, … (1). This looks to me as an open subject because psychology of motivation is still in its infancy (also as a consequence of our ignorance regarding the nature of consciousness).All the best Christophe(1) http://crmenant.free.fr/Biosemiotics3/INDEX.HTM Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:56:43 +0100From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Fis] Information - Meaning - Knowledge Friday, September 19, 2008, 12:27:06 AM, Christophe wrote: Folks, Answering to Joseph, I relate meaning to information by a systemic approach based on constraint satisfaction that allows an evolutionary/bottom-up usage (http://cogprints.org/6014/). So with this, a meaning exists relatively to a system submitted to a constraint. A meaning (a meaningful information) is the result of an interpretation by a system that has a constraint to satisfy. Isn't this a reformulation or generalisation of Wittgenstein's meaning as use? -- Robin Faichney http://www.robinfaichney.org/ _ Installez gratuitement les 20 émôticones Windows Live Messenger les plus fous ! Cliquez ici ! http://www.emoticones-messenger.fr/___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Neuroscience of art
Prof. Grohn, List: I am curious about what you are seeking to communicate when you write: I am afraid that list can't be validated as a set laws. Laws should be independent of each other. What is the rational for your feelings about law (singular) vs laws (plural)? Is it necessary that laws be independent? Or merely desirable? If it is merely desirable, what feelings should I trust in order to seek my desires? Some conductors assert that they have the capacity to serially play a major piece in their minds. Is this in any way related to the desire for laws to independent of one another? Cheers Jerry ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Neuroscience of art
Lauri -- Well, let's see: (1) First Law of thermodynamics: The total energy of a thermodynamically isolated system remains unchanged. (2) Second Law of thermodynamics: If there are any energy gradients in a system, they undergo transformations from one form to another, with some of it getting taken up as heat energy at each step. (3) Third Law of thermodynamics: At Zero degrees Kelvin energy transformations must cease. (4) Fourth Law of thermodynamics: Dissipative structures in non-equilibrium conditions tend to maximize their surfaces where energy transformations take place. Can we see in what ways these might be dependent of each other? (1) All concern energy (2) Numbers 2-4 concern energy transformations. (3) Numbers 3 and 4 concern rates of energy transformations. In what ways are they independent of each other? (1) Number one establishes the condition of thermodynamic isolation. (2) Number 2 establishes a necessary decay of a system into unusable heat energy. (3) Number 3 establishes a lower bound on rate of energy transformations. (4) Number 4 establishes a relation between form and rate of energy transformations. There is currently being considered what might become elevated to a Fifth Law -- the maximum entropy production principle, to the effect that a system connected to an energy gradient, if it can reorganize to different conformations, will tend to assume the one that maximizes its entropy production from that gradient. This, like 2-4 concerns energy transformations, like 3 and 4 it concerns rates of energy transformations, like 4 it concerns system form in relation to energy dissipation. It differs from 4 in its focus particularly on entropy production rather than energy dissipation. Only some energy dissipation needs to result in heat energy, with some going to conformations of lower potential energy gradient. So, then, are these laws independent of each other? STAN -- Hi all, I am afraid that list can't be validated as a set laws. Laws should be independent of each other. Regards, Lauri Gröhn metacomposer www.synestesia.fi On 18.9.2008, at 18.30, Sonu Bhaskar wrote: The cognizance between the art and cognitive neuroscience has been relatively ignored in the scientific fraternity. The recent proposition regarding the ten laws of art, as Dr. V. S. Ramachandran puts it, has ignited a new debate among the philosophers and the neuroscientists about neural correlates of art in its different forms. Professor Ramachandran's suggested 10 universal laws of art: 1. Peak shift 2. Grouping 3. Contrast 4. Isolation 5. Perception problem solving 6. Symmetry 7. Abhorrence of coincidence/generic viewpoint 8. Repetition, rhythm and orderliness 9. Balance 10. Metaphor ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] (no subject)
Hi everyone, I saw John Onians, who writes below, speak at a conference here in Australia and was impressed by his work. I didn't want his message to pass unremarked because there's much underneath that relates to this discussion. Onians explores how physical materials are part of the loop between thought, expression and introspection. For example, the Greeks saw young men as a barrier between themselves and external warring states, so their images of young men are made from the same materials as Greek walls and buildings - marble. Whereas in ancient China, young men were seen as a resource so their images were made out of the materials associated with food collection and earth - ceramics. I am simplifying, but if I understand correctly, Pedro, Sonu and John intersect at different parts of the same process. I am interested how we establish causal reasoning in stories. Through the lens of storymaking, the 'cognits' Pedro speaks of form networks that channel according to the sorts of principles that Sonu has posted. The symmetry principle includes a need for introspection, which can manifest in art - structures that seem to reflect what we know. From my perspective, this means the causal equivalences formed in the mind are expressed as connections between fabrics that are seen as equivalent. This would make metaphor a concrete embodiment of something happening at a cognitive level. And stories too, which Mark Turner, in cognitive science, says reflects cognitive process. John notes that testing is needed. Ted Goranson, who also posts to this list, and myself have been isolating some of of these principles for application in artificial intelligence. Materials (which we think of as residue) is included. Like others who have recently posted, this topic converges on my area of research, so I will follow the discussion with great interest. Cheers, Beth. Hi,everyone, I have been listening in and behaving myself till now, taking great interest in the discussion of big issues. Now I want to step in because with Ramachandran's 'laws' the big issues are coming down to specifics in my area. For the last fifteen years I have been trying to use neuroscience to help understand the history of art and have been delighted to discover that neuroscientists are similarly engaged, following a two and a half thousand year tradition. Indeed, last year I published a book with Yale reviewing that history 'Neuroarthistory. From Aristotle and Pliny to Baxandall and Zeki'. It is fascinating that big thinkers have been trying to formulate laws-or at least principles-in this area. But of course nobobody until today had enough knowledge of the brain to explore the neurological foundations of those principles. Now I believe we do, and my next two books will endeavour to do that. One puzzle for me is that people in neuroaesthetics tend to disregard neural plasticity which to me is an essential tool as I try to explain why different individuals have made art in different ways at different times and in different places. That is why I differentiate my activity, which has much in common with neuroaesthetics, as neuroarthistory. What I am trying to do is to formulate principles which explain those differences, using the record of all art worldwide from prehistory to the present as experimental material. If you want to find out a bit about this project you can read the introductory material to my Atlas of World Art 2004(just reissued in a cheaper edition as the Atlas of Art 2008). I like to think that the wealth of data provided by that rich record allows us both to formulate and test such principles. The testing is the essential part. Whether the principles I -and others working in this area-come up with are eventually recognised as laws remains to be seen, John ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
