Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. A First Preferred Itinerary
Caro Pedro e Cari Tutti, credo di potere affermare, da economista e senza offesa per nessuno, che la biologia è la scienza più fantastica che esista. Dai fondamenti biologici della conoscenza (Maturana e Varela) dipendono gli atteggiamenti comportamentali ricorsivi e descritti semanticamente, quindi il linguaggio (lingua e parole), la cultura, la relazionalità sociale, l'indispensabile etica dell'amore o amore dell'etica. Cioè tutta la vita umana. Quindi, seppure con la cautela e la raffinatezza degli artisti, più che degli scienziati, non mi preoccuperei tanto di riempire di significato il "bio della semiotica". Naturalmente e culturalmente so che questo nostro twittare o comunicare tarzaniano può creare qualche problema, inclusivo e esclusivo, ma il dibattito o la discussione risulta utile, efficace ed efficiente. Il che non è cosa da poco, grazie anche al prestigio e allo spessore scientifico di molti di Voi. Grazie ancora. Un abbraccio. Francesco Rizzo. 2015-10-27 14:37 GMT+01:00 Pedro C. Marijuan : > Dear Joseph and Colleagues, > > Thanks for the further comment. The relationships between the Five Momenta > are always occurring in the background, as witnessed by those dense > citation maps fashionable today, but have not been organized yet along the > relatively strange sequence proposed. As you say, it would be good to > discuss other alternatives. From my part, a strong emphasis should be put, > I think, in the separation between Momenta and "Instrumenta", quite > convenient along most of the itinerary. Given that within Instrumenta there > would be included quite strategic items from physics, computer science, > info theory, logics, etc. (see below in the mesg previous to Joseph's) the > point becomes rather contentious. To reinforce it in the form of a potent > Latin dictum: /Instrumenta numquam sunt momenta. > > /It militates against the most frequent practice in our medium, starting > usually in some particular physico-theoretical item and ascending towards > successive generalizations. Alternatively, the itinerary suggests a "new > tao", a new way to organize our info foundations reminiscent of the > collegian, multidisciplinary way that metrical standards were developed > during the past three centuries (Robert P. Crease, 2011). We are dealing > with information science foundations, and creation of new "standards", an > enterprise where in spite of their enormous scientific-technological > importance, contents of the Instrumenta are only useful tools helping to > better explore and elaborate the different portions and interrelationshisps > of the Momenta. > > If the above is right, even rather partially, we have been following the > wrong strategy decade after decade... > > About what disciplines are (to Loet) the terms I wrongly reproduced --it > should be: "communities of inquirers... under an economy of research"-- > were taken from C.H. Peirce. I think they are a very adequate > characterization, beyond the metaphor. But of course, any characterization > of the disciplinary branching phenomena will fail in one or another > respect. > > best--Pedro > > > Joseph Brenner wrote: > >> Dear Pedro and Colleagues, >> >> Pedro's note has brought out more clearly to me the concept of an >> 'Itinerary' as a path between Momenta. I for one would be willing to >> accept >> the discipline that comments should address relations and movement between >> Momenta in an AGREED UPON SEQUENCE. The one in Pedro's note is certainly a >> valid option, and perhaps we should try to list just one or two others to >> choose from. I think the term Pedro uses of 'itinerary elements' is >> consistent with this. >> >> This approach, if implemented, would have the advantage that I have often >> urged: each of us would have to study something he or she has not >> studied previously, or not in this context. There would be some unity in >> this resulting diversity, at least in the order of the discussion. >> >> The overlaps and interactions between Momenta other than the next one in >> line should not be neglected, but they can remain in the background. >> Comments welcome. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Joseph >> >> >> - Original Message - From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" < >>> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> >>> To: >>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 2:14 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. Five Itineraries >>> >>> >>> Dear FIS colleagues, Thanks to all for the valuable insights. Responding briefly: To Joseph: perhaps your points, although interesting, are not truly an itinerary. For instance, WuKun and Lupasco belong to the First Momentum (philos.). I agree that they can be adequate first steps (but there might be some others, such as Merleau Ponty, Ortega y Gasset, etc.). Once some temporary philo basis is attained, one has to visit --I think--the neurodynamic counterpart of those tenets (Momentum 3, neuro). From there, a complex evo-devo panorama opens (visiting Moment
Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. A First Preferred Itinerary
Dear Joseph and Colleagues, Thanks for the further comment. The relationships between the Five Momenta are always occurring in the background, as witnessed by those dense citation maps fashionable today, but have not been organized yet along the relatively strange sequence proposed. As you say, it would be good to discuss other alternatives. From my part, a strong emphasis should be put, I think, in the separation between Momenta and "Instrumenta", quite convenient along most of the itinerary. Given that within Instrumenta there would be included quite strategic items from physics, computer science, info theory, logics, etc. (see below in the mesg previous to Joseph's) the point becomes rather contentious. To reinforce it in the form of a potent Latin dictum: /Instrumenta numquam sunt momenta. /It militates against the most frequent practice in our medium, starting usually in some particular physico-theoretical item and ascending towards successive generalizations. Alternatively, the itinerary suggests a "new tao", a new way to organize our info foundations reminiscent of the collegian, multidisciplinary way that metrical standards were developed during the past three centuries (Robert P. Crease, 2011). We are dealing with information science foundations, and creation of new "standards", an enterprise where in spite of their enormous scientific-technological importance, contents of the Instrumenta are only useful tools helping to better explore and elaborate the different portions and interrelationshisps of the Momenta. If the above is right, even rather partially, we have been following the wrong strategy decade after decade... About what disciplines are (to Loet) the terms I wrongly reproduced --it should be: "communities of inquirers... under an economy of research"-- were taken from C.H. Peirce. I think they are a very adequate characterization, beyond the metaphor. But of course, any characterization of the disciplinary branching phenomena will fail in one or another respect. best--Pedro Joseph Brenner wrote: Dear Pedro and Colleagues, Pedro's note has brought out more clearly to me the concept of an 'Itinerary' as a path between Momenta. I for one would be willing to accept the discipline that comments should address relations and movement between Momenta in an AGREED UPON SEQUENCE. The one in Pedro's note is certainly a valid option, and perhaps we should try to list just one or two others to choose from. I think the term Pedro uses of 'itinerary elements' is consistent with this. This approach, if implemented, would have the advantage that I have often urged: each of us would have to study something he or she has not studied previously, or not in this context. There would be some unity in this resulting diversity, at least in the order of the discussion. The overlaps and interactions between Momenta other than the next one in line should not be neglected, but they can remain in the background. Comments welcome. Best wishes, Joseph - Original Message - From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" To: Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 2:14 PM Subject: Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. Five Itineraries Dear FIS colleagues, Thanks to all for the valuable insights. Responding briefly: To Joseph: perhaps your points, although interesting, are not truly an itinerary. For instance, WuKun and Lupasco belong to the First Momentum (philos.). I agree that they can be adequate first steps (but there might be some others, such as Merleau Ponty, Ortega y Gasset, etc.). Once some temporary philo basis is attained, one has to visit --I think--the neurodynamic counterpart of those tenets (Momentum 3, neuro). From there, a complex evo-devo panorama opens (visiting Momentum 2). Then it would be high time to return to M1, to consolidate the basis within an adequate heuristic "neuro-biologic-ethologic.cognitive-philosophic" approach to human prosocial capabilities, language included. Time for visiting M5 (infoeconomics of social complexity, development of human history). From there, to M6 (contemporary info revolution, problems of our time). Back to M1, proposing an overall new way of thinking, plus quite many further movements of refinement and deeper analysis... To Stan: if hierarchy helps to move into the previous multidisciplinary entanglement fine, otherwise it is a useless item to be kept into the lean mental "backpack" needed for this itinerary... To Loet and Marcus: let us agree that disciplines are based on "communities of inquiry" that follow strict laws of "intellectual economy". Our limited capabilities force us to establish disciplinary specialization, and that's good, but a healthy knowledge system would also establish quite many "vertical" multidisciplines integrating the "horizontal" disciplines that apply simultaneously into concrete subjects (as happens in eg, medicine, engineering, anthrolpology, etc.). To Steven and Soeren, Francesc
[Fis] Five Momenta. A First Preferred Itinerary
Dear Pedro and Colleagues, Pedro's note has brought out more clearly to me the concept of an 'Itinerary' as a path between Momenta. I for one would be willing to accept the discipline that comments should address relations and movement between Momenta in an AGREED UPON SEQUENCE. The one in Pedro's note is certainly a valid option, and perhaps we should try to list just one or two others to choose from. I think the term Pedro uses of 'itinerary elements' is consistent with this. This approach, if implemented, would have the advantage that I have often urged: each of us would have to study something he or she has not studied previously, or not in this context. There would be some unity in this resulting diversity, at least in the order of the discussion. The overlaps and interactions between Momenta other than the next one in line should not be neglected, but they can remain in the background. Comments welcome. Best wishes, Joseph - Original Message - From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" To: Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 2:14 PM Subject: Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. Five Itineraries Dear FIS colleagues, Thanks to all for the valuable insights. Responding briefly: To Joseph: perhaps your points, although interesting, are not truly an itinerary. For instance, WuKun and Lupasco belong to the First Momentum (philos.). I agree that they can be adequate first steps (but there might be some others, such as Merleau Ponty, Ortega y Gasset, etc.). Once some temporary philo basis is attained, one has to visit --I think--the neurodynamic counterpart of those tenets (Momentum 3, neuro). From there, a complex evo-devo panorama opens (visiting Momentum 2). Then it would be high time to return to M1, to consolidate the basis within an adequate heuristic "neuro-biologic-ethologic.cognitive-philosophic" approach to human prosocial capabilities, language included. Time for visiting M5 (infoeconomics of social complexity, development of human history). From there, to M6 (contemporary info revolution, problems of our time). Back to M1, proposing an overall new way of thinking, plus quite many further movements of refinement and deeper analysis... To Stan: if hierarchy helps to move into the previous multidisciplinary entanglement fine, otherwise it is a useless item to be kept into the lean mental "backpack" needed for this itinerary... To Loet and Marcus: let us agree that disciplines are based on "communities of inquiry" that follow strict laws of "intellectual economy". Our limited capabilities force us to establish disciplinary specialization, and that's good, but a healthy knowledge system would also establish quite many "vertical" multidisciplines integrating the "horizontal" disciplines that apply simultaneously into concrete subjects (as happens in eg, medicine, engineering, anthrolpology, etc.). To Steven and Soeren, Francesco, and all: Should'nt we distinguish the above itinerary elements (actually smallish parts from a number of disciples and subdisciplines) from the "instrumental" fields of knowledge that can be used "on tap" but quite often are used "on top"? I mean, classical and new Info theories, von Neumann theories (automata, machines, games), Turing and computational approaches, symmetry studies, entropy studies, quantum information, physical information, mathematical optimization procedures, etc. should not occupy the leading seat in this trip. To insist, they are instrumental just to help, strictly kept under command, along the different elaboration stages of the itinerary. In the extent to which a similar scheme would be valid intelectually, would it be feasible too? "If we were rich" a system of scientific committees could be created, seriously working during several years, at the style of the serious international cooperative work that have lead to the International System of Measurement Standards. So important was and has been the standardization of measurements, and we take it for granted. Curiously, it has an essential informational content regarding the "social brain"... Anyhow, only an important university could take charge of this genuine FIS itinerary. Alternatively, "if we were Linus", a Infopedia could organize the whole voluntary work... but how could we find our Linus? Best wishes to all, --Pedro ___ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
