Dear Pedro,
Thank you for your note, and I look forward to hearing more as your
thoughts ripen.
To help stir your thoughts . . . re “missing agency . . . factually
minimized under the form of
constraints and uncertainty.“
I partly to agree with you, in that agency in not an initial focus. But
I also hope you see that an analysis that “ends in a phenomenology of
useful information“ anticipates agency in some way. I also hope you see
item 5 from the introductory text alludes heavily to agency. Still, I can
see how this minimal presentation is unsatisfying . . . But, I do go into
detail on agency in supplemental papers #3 and #4, and even paper #2
broaches the matter.
I think part of the challenge here is that an a priori analysis does
not automatically raise issues of agency, unless one thinks information
arises *only* in the presence of agency. If that is the case (for you) I
will have to wait to hear more from you before I say more.
> My central question: could there be any form of non-living agency?
A "society of atoms" interacting at a quantum level, producing molecular
quantum puddles?
> And then, What different forms of life could receive the "agent" label?
Or how do we even define life? Action potentials? Transmitted how? All big
questions . . .
> How being alive biases the non-at-all-free communication game?
Just too big now . . . I cannot even begin to speculate here.
These are all interesting and exciting issues . . . I look forward to
hearing more!
Marcus
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
