Re: Consciousness and information, etc.

[John M <***>]

John K, thanks for the idea.

I tackled with these terms a decade before I first heard about RR and did
not compare all concepts of mine when I learned some items of Rosenism. I am
still trying to think with my own head. That's what I got that's what I use.

Now that I think about it, "my" information" (ANY difference when absorbed
(call it: acknowledged) by ANYTHING/(anybody) is essential in this
pan-sensitivity, which I picked up in lieu of "pan-psychic" - a pejorative
laughing stock of the psych domain that was cited against me. I am not the
birth-father of the terms.
After said that about 'info', my pan-sensitivity refers to it as a quale to
respond to (any) info. Like a stone to an applied pressure: it falls apart.
(Not only from 'single cell (living?) organisms' up).
In such unlimited interefficiency of them all it really jibes like RR-Cxty.
Definitely not restricted to the Universe - Milky way - Solar System -
Earth-surface - Biosphere - C-Air-Water living(?) organisms, the domain of
"bio".

Sorry, I cannot distinguish it from consciousness, which should be first
satisfactorily (and acceptably for all) identified, which it is not. With
all that anticipatory generalizations the universe is pan-sensitive
(conscious?) and everything within is so. A non-quantitative
multidisciplinary rigor is needed for identifying the terms. (A quantitative
rigorous analysis is being applied in the (applied) mathematical sciences in
the one-plane restricted quale of the modeled quantities. Here we need the
rest of the aspects as well).
This was the reason why I urged to compose a glossary, but the honored
listers did not disclose much enthusiasm for that arduous work.
>"What little is known about non-human perception ..."<
There are volumes of 'what does it feel to be a bat, later a worm, but this
is still animal-domain. What does an amino acid feel about an acidity that
it makes it twist around?  Or an NH3 molecule about heat, that it falls
apart?  If we substitute our human terms for non-human animals, why not do
it in total generalization? Try to think consequently about nature, ie. the
complex wholeness.

(I appreciate your selective (topic-related) copying)

Thanks again

John M

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Kineman" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Consciousness and information, etc.


> JohnM and Judith,
>
> I think I'm coming to the position that "pan-sensitivity" as JM
> describes it, is essentially Rosennean complexity and thus intrinsic in
> all natural systems.
>
> I think we would have to then distinguish it from consciousness except
> in the most general sense imaginable (I think its a gradient, not a
> threshold); because of the extensive use of this term to describe
> certain forms of sensitivity and awareness known to us through human
> experience. Because of that unavoidable bias, we tend to focus on and
> distinguish certain kinds of sensitivity and anticipation (such as
> thinking) as quite special, yet we are less aware of how that might
> grade into other experiences in other life forms. What little is known
> about non-human perception tells us that it can be very foreign to our
> experience and yet equally effective for the purposes of life.
>
> John K.
>
outside of it?"
> >
> >Judith
S N I P

> >
> >
>