>”import any useful concepts from any field whatsoever as long as they share >some commonalities with biology.”
Sung, my own preference is to look first to my axiomatic principles, and then establish whether observations from reality accord. In this instance, “knowing how to be”, as a logical extension of Peirce’s pragmatism, provides the basis for my inference. It fits. For ultimately, for any entity, defining the things that matter IS about knowing how to be. sj From: sji.confor...@gmail.com [mailto:sji.confor...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Sungchul Ji Sent: Tuesday, 2 February 2016 3:46 AM To: biosemiotics Cc: Ed Dellian; Sergey Petoukhov; Robert E. Ulanowicz Subject: [biosemiotics:9127] Re: Pragmatism - atoms, molecules, entanglement Hi Stephen and list, Thanks for the interesting link. I learned a lot from it. The animation was amazing and seems to faithfully reflect the current state of our molecular biological knowledge. To understand the molecular machine phenomena shown in the video clip, it may be necessary for us to go outside the traditional boundaries of biology, physics and chemistry and import any useful concepts from any field whatsoever as long as they share some commonalities with biology. One way that Peircean semiotics may be able to help us understand the miraculous molecular processes that go on in living cells may be the idea of semiosis, or sign processes. The concept of molecular machines is primarily of the physics and engineering origin, which is necessary but may not be sufficient. The missing component may be the concept of the sign. That is, molecular machines are not only machines but also SIGNS. Most, if not all, Peircean signs are irreducibly triadic. Hence, if we can view molecular machines as signs, we can use the following triadic template of the Peircean sign or semiosis: f g EVOLUTION -------> MOLECULAR MACHINES -------> FUNCTIONS (Object) (Sign) (Interpretant) | ^ | | | | |____________________________________________| h Figure 1. Molecular Machines as Peircean Signs. f = Actualization of possibilities; g = environment-induced selection; h = genetic information flow. It is assumed that f followed by g leads to the same result as h, i.e., the 3-node network is a mathematical category. If this picture is correct, what we see in the video clip can be interpreted as a finite set of molecular and cellular processes selected by the biological evolution out of an infinite number of similar processes allowed for by the laws of physics (or someone may prefer to say by God or its equivalent). The marvelous computer animation technology that now allows us see the inner workings of life may be compared to Galileo's telescope with which he was able to see the rough surface of the Moon for the first time. Just as astronomers since then found the almost infinite Universe (of galaxies) out there, so perhaps biologists will discover the almost infinite Universe (of living processes) in us. Inline image 1 http://www.universetoday.com/15763/galileos-telescope/ All the best. Sung -- Sungchul Ji, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy Rutgers University Piscataway, N.J. 08855 732-445-4701 www.conformon.net <http://www.conformon.net/> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au> wrote: List, I stumbled upon a fascinating video clip <https://youtu.be/FzcTgrxMzZk> on the weekend. Might Peircean-biosemiotic concepts apply also to atoms and molecules? Peirce’s “mind hidebound with habits” comes to mind. But back in his day, Peirce could never have known what we now know about quantum physics and entanglement – he’d have much to say about all this were he alive today. Atoms and molecules also have to “know” very specific properties in order to make possible the astonishing complexity within a cell. Entanglement is the medium by which atoms and molecules “know” (imitate) their properties. sj
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
