Re: Question, version 2

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

Dan,

Building models (relational or reductionistic) is an epistemological act of
abstracting from a natural system to a formal system. As I read it, "can be
separated from" appears to refer to fractionation: an ontological claim that
"aliveness" (as Langton calls it) is some logical property that can be
fractionated from a material system. As such, I see no real similarity
between the two quotes.

Regards,
Tim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:*** Behalf Of Dan
> Fiscus
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 3:47 PM
> To: ***
> Subject: Re: Question, version 2
>
>
> Tim,
>
> I don't think I get your drift - can you say more?
>
> Are you saying that Langton's "can be separated from"
> is different from Rosen's "keep the organization and
> throw away the matter"? I mean, I think the two have
> big differences when these comments are seen in total
> context of their full works. But I am not sure what you
> are asking/saying...
>
> Dan
>
> Tim Gwinn wrote:
> > Dan, John,
> >
> > Look at the quotes again. Think about the difference between
> building models
> > of some material system versus the notion that "the ‘logical form’ of an
> > organism can be separated from its material basis of construction". In
> > particular, what does the phrase "can be separated from" mean?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
>
> snip
>
> >>>>Langton’s and other’s view of Artificial Life is that they also want
> >>>>to get beyond particular material realizations of life. Langton says:
> >>>> “Of course, the principle assumption made in Artificial Life is that
> >>>>the ‘logical form’ of an organism can be separated from its material
> >>>>basis of construction, and that ‘aliveness’ will be found to be a
> >>>>property of the former, not of the latter.” (Artificial Life,
> >>>>Langton, ed., Addison-Wesley, 1989, p.11.)