Re: [Fis] Explaining Experience In Nature
Dear Steven, I have made a first reading of your text and am sympathetic to its objectives. Three quick comments: a) In 1947, Stephane Lupasco wrote: Logic is experience; experience is logic. He then and I now in my rework of his theory Logic in Reality (2008) Dordrecht: Springer reject standard logic in favor of a logic of real physical interactions. Thus when you write about opposition against the primitive, the dynamics of opposition look very similar. b) My logical system, however, does not have to establish a new primitive, since I believe all the necessary interactions can be derived from the fundamental physical dualities at the quantum level, percolating into the thermodynamic and eventually the cognitive world. c) Under these circumstances, I would like to understand the necessity of the concept of Peircean signs. In what way is it necessary to say that physical, informational processes, in which information is both a means to model the world, and a part of the world modeled, are something else than what they are? Can you please expand on this point? Perhaps the complete book does this, but I am concerned that the manuscript as is fails to discuss the implications of your approach to information as in the work that has become familiar to me of the people in the FIS group, also Floridi and others. Perhaps you can outline a specific advance you have made which will make it easier to comment. Thank you and best wishes, Joseph Message d'origine De: ste...@semeiosis.org Date: 02.03.2010 20:49 À: Foundations of Information Science Information Sciencefis@listas.unizar.es Objet: [Fis] Explaining Experience In Nature Dear List, After two years of intense and difficult work I am finally prepared to represent my Introductory Remarks, the first 75 pages of my book Explaining Experience In Nature: The Foundations of Logic and Apprehension. I am still shy of showing off the mathematics, that'll please some and disappoint others, but I do encourage my friends to read this update. This update is, I feel, a significant advance over earlier work and a plausible attack on the Church-Turing Thesis. The update can be found at: http://senses.info With respect, Steven --Dr. Steven Ericsson-ZenithInstitute for Advanced Science amp; Engineeringhttp://iase.infohttp://senses.info ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Explaining Experience In Nature
Dear Joe, I confess that it takes me half a day to review my Introductory Remarks. Your comments are received within an hour of my notification to the list. So I suspect that if you spend a little more time actually reading the content of my work you will find most of your questions answered. I will take the time to review your comments below, especially those that relate to the information science aspects of my work, and I will offer a considered response to them later. My initial suggestion is that you read my notes on Quantum Mechanics found in the manuscript. With respect, Steven On Mar 2, 2010, at 4:06 PM, joe.bren...@bluewin.ch wrote: Dear Steven, I have made a first reading of your text and am sympathetic to its objectives. Three quick comments: a) In 1947, Stephane Lupasco wrote: Logic is experience; experience is logic. He then and I now in my rework of his theory Logic in Reality (2008) Dordrecht: Springer reject standard logic in favor of a logic of real physical interactions. Thus when you write about opposition against the primitive, the dynamics of opposition look very similar. b) My logical system, however, does not have to establish a new primitive, since I believe all the necessary interactions can be derived from the fundamental physical dualities at the quantum level, percolating into the thermodynamic and eventually the cognitive world. c) Under these circumstances, I would like to understand the necessity of the concept of Peircean signs. In what way is it necessary to say that physical, informational processes, in which information is both a means to model the world, and a part of the world modeled, are something else than what they are? Can you please expand on this point? Perhaps the complete book does this, but I am concerned that the manuscript as is fails to discuss the implications of your approach to information as in the work that has become familiar to me of the people in the FIS group, also Floridi and others. Perhaps you can outline a specific advance you have made which will make it easier to comment. Thank you and best wishes, Joseph Message d'origine De: ste...@semeiosis.org Date: 02.03.2010 20:49 À: Foundations of Information Science Information Sciencefis@listas.unizar.es Objet: [Fis] Explaining Experience In Nature Dear List, After two years of intense and difficult work I am finally prepared to represent my Introductory Remarks, the first 75 pages of my book Explaining Experience In Nature: The Foundations of Logic and Apprehension. I am still shy of showing off the mathematics, that'll please some and disappoint others, but I do encourage my friends to read this update. This update is, I feel, a significant advance over earlier work and a plausible attack on the Church-Turing Thesis. The update can be found at: http://senses.info With respect, Steven -- Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith Institute for Advanced Science Engineering http://iase.info http://senses.info -- Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith Institute for Advanced Science Engineering http://iase.info http://senses.info ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
[Fis] Explaining Experience in Nature
Dear Colleagues, We have started a new information site at http://senses.info and I have just posted a sample chapter from my book there as a stimulus and discussion point for a workshop we are holding at Stanford University's Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) in March. The sample chapter can be found here: http://senses.info/explaining-experience-in-nature/introductory- remarks/ The workshop, under the same theme, deals with The Foundations of Logic and Apprehension, and details can be found here: http://iase.info/symposiums/stanford/2007/Explaining-Experience- in-Nature.html The workshop is small and invitation only, if you are interested in participating please contact myself or one of the programme committee to express an interest. The goal of the workshop is to explore the formalization of theories that explain experience in nature, and to tackle exactly what such a theory and formalization might look like. The proceedings of the workshop will be published in a new academic journal entitled Explaining Experience that we will launch mid year. If you are interested in participating on the Editorial Board of this journal then please contact me and I will send you the journal proposal. Sincerely, Steven -- Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith Institute for Advanced Science Engineering http://iase.info ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
