Re: mind not like a computer

[Ayten Aydin <***>]

Dear Judith,

I agree with your evaluation of the situation and your worries on the follow up - what comes after these promising steps. To my mind next steps are not fully the business of physicists, though highly welcome. It is important that they accept the limitations of the analytical worldview and support the work of those who can open to them wider doors and broader fields. Only then the hard way will start and all the hidden aspects of dealing with organisms will have to be faced,  not in an analytical way but through analogies within the same or with other organisms such as social organisms etc. as RR intended to do. This requires a huge mental shift. My coming paper deals with that (its copyright has been surrendered but I may pull out some passages as the discussions on this list come close)  That is why I attached the chart I drew on worldviews today to use during presentation. Any comments by you will be welcome as I may always revise it until the end of this month. I will not attach it to the paper, but only use it as a tool to explain my point. Here is attached again. I hope you receive it this time. You please let me know whether it is received this time. Otherwise I send it from the other computer  or through my daughter.

All the best,

Attachment: WORLDVIEWS2.doc
Description: MS-Word document

Ayten

On Jun 30, 2005, at 5:39 PM, Judith Rosen wrote:

> Hi Ayten,
>  
> I think I didn't convey enough of my own delight at the general conclusion of the Cornell research team-- I am in full agreement with you on your assessment of what it means.
>  
> My gentle exasperation is due to the fact that I have been hearing their conclusion all my life. By the way, as I was mulling this study over in my mind, I thought... isn't it interesting that it was interaction between human mind and computer that gave them their proof? I like that, a lot! There's a certain symmetry in it, somehow.
>  
> I also agree that this kind of finding (and especially the fact that it is being published and reported) is a huge step in the right direction. But my point was that such a finding will, hopefully lead them to conclude; "OK; if the mind is more like an organism than like a computer, we need to study organisms to understand the principles behind it... but our findings mean we can't study organisms the way we study computational issues... so...."
>  
> I'm hoping they will realize that this reasoning leads them into the wilderness beyond current physics and that the work in Life, Itself is a  detailed map of the terrain.
>  
> Judith
>
> > <x-tad-bigger>----- Original Message -----</x-tad-bigger>
> > <x-tad-bigger>From:</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> </x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger>Ayten Aydin</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> </x-tad-bigger>
> > <x-tad-bigger>To:</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> </x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger>***</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> </x-tad-bigger>
> > <x-tad-bigger>Sent:</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> Thursday, June 30, 2005 10:14 AM</x-tad-bigger>
> > <x-tad-bigger>Subject:</x-tad-bigger><x-tad-bigger> Re: [ROSEN] mind not like a computer</x-tad-bigger>
> >
> > Dear Judith,
> > I found that article as well as the book of R.B. Lauphlin (A Different Universe) as a good step towards your query of Why are living organisms the way they are??? Physicists started to question the limitation of their analytical world leaving a lot still to be understood within the analogical world of which they also form a part. The world is moving slowly but surely in the right direction as there is no alternative in the present circumstances! We should take advantage of this new wave and connect. By the way I recently drawn a chart (attached) in connection with a paper I shall present to a symposium in a close field which is another attempt in the same direction. Any comment?
> > Is it again my optimism?? 
> > My best,
> >
> >
> > Ayten