Just to be clear about this, Alfredo, at any instant 70%  of the input into the visual cortex is from sources within the organism itself.

The experience of perception is NOT caused by excitation of one or several or a number of individual cells in your eye,

On 21 Mar 2010, at 12:10, Roger Harnden wrote:

One can use any word one wants, Alfredo....and  it was me, not Luc who mentioned the tree.

All I am saying that for the human being as a biological organism there are no single datum, there are only data. And we use our powers of investigation to draw marks in the sand, and say 'this is a quark.....that is a human.....this act is evil....etc, etc'. But each of these are just marks in the sand, as both Spencer Brown and Varela indicated.

But that is not a limitation - that is the foundation of human beings and understanding.

If you want to restrict it to visual sensations, Maturana's work on vision is absolutely clear: single sensors are excited and trigger further excitations. The actual sensor has no sensation at is just a switch that is triggered or not triggered. In point of fact the many singularities that bombard our sensors all the time (including our eyes) set up non-stop reverberations into our nervous system. Many (most) of these lead to no sensation (of sight) whatsoever....they just dissipate. It is only upon the triggering of a great number of sensors and their subsequent reverberations and interconnectivity with other reverberations from other sources (including those within the nervous system itself, as cyclical excitations which characterise memory or association), that we get anywhere near something that might be called (and experienced as) the sensation of sight. Hope that helps


On 21 Mar 2010, at 11:49, Alfredo Moscardini wrote:

I am undestanding more and more and also understanding less and less!!!

Luc has brought in a tree.

OK I can see that I personally interpret what I see as a tree and the concept of treeness is absolutely tied to my expeierience and me.  OK.  What I want to know is what word do we agree to use to describe the visual sensations impinging on my retina.  I want to call this data and the changing of this data into the concept ' tree'  is changing this data into information


----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Harnden <[log in to unmask]>

Date: Sunday, March 21, 2010 11:36 am

Subject: Re: Information closure

> I omitted relating my previous response to a model such as VSM,
> Alfredo:
> Yes, Stafford used the concept of organisational closure to
> develop
> his model, and integrated aspects of other people's work. For
> structural coupling, he used variety balancing, but restricting
> this
> (as you imply) to information and exchange of information. I am
> not
> sure whether more precise distinctions are important here -
> Stafford'sd own definitions are quite to the point - I forget what
> they are in line with the shape of your query, Alfredo. What I am
> saying is that many of the points I made in my previous message
> don't
> matter in terms of understanding VSM. I was answering more generally.
> So, I''ll go through each of your points:
> On 21 Mar 2010, at 10:07, Alfredo Moscardini wrote:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For more information go to: For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For more information go to: For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~