On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:58 PM, Clark Goble cl...@libertypages.com wrote:
On Sep 17, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Frederik Stjernfelt stj...@hum.ku.dk
mailto:stj...@hum.ku.dk wrote:
I am not sure complexity is enough, also because of the fact that we have no
agreed-upon measurement of the degree of
Dear Jeff, lists -
I am sorry you sense dark shades ...
But most of what I say in the NP book does not depend upon these speculations -
which were prompted by somebody, I forgot who, inquiring into the notoriously
murkuy waters of the beginnings of life and semiotics.
What I am thinking of -
Frederik, List:
On Sep 17, 2014, at 4:08 PM, Frederik Stjernfelt wrote:
1) simple metabolism, self-sustaining chemaical cycles - whose
self-sustainment implies they are prone to adapt to searching for the
compounds they need to continue the cycle,
Huh?
I am unaware of any such cycles.
Wow. Lots of posts since I checked in last. I’ll try to answer as best I can in
the time I have. It’s a very busy week for me, so apologies if I don’t answer
or answer in a half hearted way.
On Sep 12, 2014, at 3:26 PM, Sungchul Ji s...@rci.rutgers.edu wrote:
Clark wrote:
Material
Dear Sung, lists -
I am not sure that this is the proper comparison.
It is possible to chart thresholds in many continuous processes - that does not
alter their continuous nature nor make them fundamentally discontinuous in any
sense. Continuity may include discontinuities - the opposite is not
-Sep-14 11:05 AM
To: Peirce List; biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee
Subject: [biosemiotics:6777] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Physics Semiosis: the limited
realm of physiosemiosis respecting physics
John, I don't think that these opposing views - whether semiosic actions
take place within the physico-chemical realm
...@lists.ut.ee ; 'Peirce List'
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 3:54 PM
Subject: RE: [biosemiotics:6777] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Physics Semiosis: the
limited realm of physiosemiosis respecting physics
Edwina, this difficulty you have with the very basic difference between
science being conducted
Dear Sung, lists …
Hmm, I think processes, at least over QM level, are generally continuous. So I
also think the transition between non-life and life is continuous (the
increasing degree of autokatalysis in the space of organic compounds) - at the
same time I think this process crosses a
Dear Frederik,
I am glad you think so.
With all the best.
Sung
Dear Sung, lists -
Interesting proposal, might be right.
Best
F
Den 13/09/2014 kl. 20.46 skrev Sungchul Ji
s...@rci.rutgers.edumailto:s...@rci.rutgers.edu
:
(For undistorted Table 1, see the attached.)
Frederik wrote:
On Sep 11, 2014, at 6:41 PM, Sungchul Ji s...@rci.rutgers.edu wrote:
However, I claim that
Unlike DNA, entropy does not have any agent, (091114-4)
other than humans, for which it can act as a sign.
Just to add, while this may be true of foundational physical concepts, we
Clark wrote in response to my statement (091114-1) below that
DNA stands for (phenotypes of living cells) for people. (091214-1)
Which I agree with. But the point Clark seems to be missing is the fact that
DNA stands for phenotypes for living cells as well. (091214-2)
The truth
If feel somewhat bad of having brought the discussion down this tangent. (I’ve
changed subject as per request) I hope you don’t mind me making one final
comment.
On Sep 7, 2014, at 4:49 AM, Frederik Stjernfelt stj...@hum.ku.dk wrote:
Not all triadicity and thirdness is semiotic - that is
12 matches
Mail list logo
