Natural Information Processing Systems

The randomness as genesis principle


Strictly speaking, the borrowing and reorganizing principle reorganizes rather than creates new information although, of course, reorganization does involve creativity. Nevertheless, a distinction does need to be made between reorganizing previously created information and an original act of creation that results in new information. A procedure for creating new knowledge is required because for a variety of reasons, useful, previously organized information obtainable via the borrowing and reorganizing principle may not be available. Consequently, natural information processing systems need distinct procedures for, on the one hand, borrowing and reorganizing previously generated information and for creating new information on the other hand.
Humans create new information during problem solving. The problem solving strategy that has undergone the most detailed study is means-ends analysis (Newell and Simon, 1972). This strategy was extensively analyzed using computer modeling during the 1970s and 80s (e.g., Sweller, 1988). In essence, the strategy requires a problem solver to repeatedly consider a current problem state, consider the goal state, extract differences between them and find a problem solving operator that can reduce those differences. Successful problem solutions can result in the creation of new knowledge that can be stored in long-term memory for subsequent use. 

 it may seem paradoxical that the order demanded of natural information processing systems has randomness as its base; that the ultimate origin of ordered information is randomness. This paradox has resulted in randomness playing little part in most cognitive theories. The paradox is reduced when it is remembered that randomness is one partner in a duality: (a) random generation and (b) tests of effectiveness. Order is established by testing randomly generated possibilities. Thus, despite the centrality of randomness in natural information processing systems, randomness as genesis provides the origin of all organized information in this class of systems. Nevertheless, because randomness is central to natural information processing systems, it has further structural implications that are discussed next. 


http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/ep04434458.pdf

Irigaray

"The science which claims to be most scientific, or the only scientific science, is only in the ethical absence of the subject. It can only make claims to non-encroachment of the subject because it is deployed in a world already constructed through and through. Already subjectivized? But we aren't supposed to know that. This kind of science leaves no room for the unexpected, for chance"


p2 Intro :"To speak is never neutral"

Art & the Instrumental : Massumi

Art foregrounds the dynamic, ongoingly relational pole. Everyday experience foregrounds the object-oriented, action-reaction, instrumental pole. That pole comes across as stable because it offers our action perches -- “affordances” in J.J. Gibson’s vocabulary. We attend to the perchiness, and let the other side of that same coin, the passing-relation side, slip behind the use we can exact from the perception. Art brings back out the fact that all form is necessarily dynamic form. There is really no such thing as fixed form – which is another way of saying that the object of vision is virtual. Art is the technique for making that necessary but normally unperceived fact perceptible, in a qualitative perception that is as much about life itself as it is about the things we live by. Art is the technique of living life in -- experiencing the virtuality of it more fully, living it more intensely.


This also suggests a way of dealing with the question of interaction in art, and why the question of whether it is art or not comes up so insistently. A distinction of Whitehead’s is useful here. He calls the experience of the flow of action “causal efficacy”, and the qualitative, vitality affect, aspect he calls “presentational immediacy.” You can’t have one without the other, but presentational immediacy tends to disappear into the flow of causal efficacy. OWe see with and through it to the affordances we take as the actual form of things. Only rarely do we do the opposite -- see with and through the actual form to the dynamism of life. Now, you have to take interactivity at its word. Its flow is a flow of action. It’s true that the flow is two-way. But the back and forth is of action and reaction. It always comes back to causal efficacy, instrumentality, affordance. This backgrounds the qualitative-relational aspect – even when it is supposed to be all about social relation. By putting relation so fully into action, interactivity backgrounds its own artistic dimension. That’s the dimension of relationality in its own right, as opposed to a particular relating-to, for this or that already determined purpose


http://www.senselab.ca/inflexions/volume_4/n1_massumihtml.html

Random Expressive Flow : Metaphor of Water

Metaphor  of water - as Common resource >

"It a very real discourse that the Ghangees is a divine mother, she has her own standing,and the government cannot block her flow, she has the right to flow free...that's the basis of fighting the dams... "(Vandana Shiva V)

Balancing quote, ( about judgement, discernment, protection  and the need for boundaries and "The power of preserving achievement"  "fitting the dynamics of the community/eco system" etc  the Membrane (7.00m)   -Swimme B))

Eg in regard to it's analogs, for example:


In Visual Art: Abstract Expressionism


In performance: Improvisation

Fluxus

Hawkins "Free Flow"

In Theory:
PataPhysics: Baudrillard
Flow : Csikszentmihalyi

These could be considered, to use the metaphor, like bottled water with added technical and secret ingredients to create a commodity with it's required, 'access rules',  experts and containers and labels....


> Research Question:
How do those aspects of discourse that are responsible for the promoting the  perception of REF as Public Common resource relate to those who are respoinsible for "adding value" to REF as a basic ingredient of  private commodity, and devising new ones?


How does this relate to the discourse re "Safety", "Validity", "Relevance""Pollution" etc


Validity> Credibility Transferability Dependability, Confirmability. (Denzin and Lincoln)

Reflexivity : Is there a niche here? or have I just changed the language  (added a layer of complexity) to define one?
Is such a concept of "Random Expressive Flow" too simple? To who and why?

R.E.F. analogs : Pataphysics...

In the 1960s 'pataphysics was used as a conceptual principle within various fine art forms, especially pop art and popular culture. Works within the 'pataphysical tradition tend to focus on the processes of their creation, and elements of chance or arbitrary choices are frequently key in those processes. Select pieces from the artist Marcel Duchamp and the composer John Cagecharacterize this. At around this time, Asger Jorn, a 'pataphysician and member of the Situationist International, referred to 'pataphysics as a new religion.

Hegemony and the concept of "Random Expressive Flow"

Considering the definition of hegemony given below, I could, reflexively, analyse the possible forms of hegemony that could frame the meaning of "Random Expressive Flow"

Conceptual (De Bono) -  Poetic/Intuitive (Poeisis/Heidegger) - Performative/Improvised(Delanda/Eshleman)

<------------------------------------------------Random Expressive Flow--------------------------------------------------->

I see 'Random Expressive Flow' as a possible simple inclusive access point to the creative commons of our planets evolutionary capacity.(c.f Deleuze bWo, morphogenic potential (Delanda)) I am not implying that Quality and Fit will inevitably emerge, just that the experiment, if it can be designed safely, should be done before we impose order based on assumptions(bad faith?c.f pragmatism) (Hogarth Hume) (1.)

Being such an open, inclusive concept, "Random Expressive Flow" offers the opportunity for the reader to select/project different meanings. It is possible certain ones will dominate, leading to a dominant discourse being generated around the concept...

For example 'Random Expressive Flow' could be assumed to be concerned  exclusively with introverted poetic intuition on one hand, or extroverted performance on the other, these could in turn be associated with  "irrelevance to rational debate"  (perhaps by a modernist) on one hand and "the potentially abusive"  (perhaps by a feminist) on the other...


It may perhaps also  be considered an enabler or a block to empathy...


Such interpretations may or may not have "validity",  depending on the context ( post structuralists would deny the refferential validity of  truth claims (Derrida)). The point is that discourse around the concept changes depending on the  perspectives/views taken..


However what  leads to the dominant discourse and what to the marginalised? How is the dominant discourse maintained? What "Truths" are claimed? (Foucault)


Compare: 
Derrida (Marginalised Discourse)
Foucault (Docile Bodies)
Habermas (Strategic & Communicative Discourse)
Giddens (Structuration/Reproduction of Structure)

REF and Discourse within institutions.

Inherent Emergent Qualities <> Qualities measured by Production  and Consumption

Random expressive flow - is it  characterised  as dangerous by/within the forces of control (institutions) (Fairclough) to maintain their positions of dominance?

Dialectic of Rational Discussion and Random Expressive Flow

Option Research Question
Deconstruction of the  binary opposition of Rational Discussion ( Communicative Action) and Random Expressive Flow  (Universal  experimental  access to Performative Empowerment )


Re:  Mission statement and financial interests of educational institutions


Contrast with Instrumental Rationality

Re Butler Habermas

Bottled Water a metaphor for the commodification of "Random Expressive Flow"?

Water- Random Expressive Flow?     

Bottle- Packaging/Language/Cultural Form/Ownership?


The water bottle phenomenon has become ‘normalized’; when we look in a classroom, on a bus, in the gym or out at lunch, it’s not about who has a bottle of water, but rather who hasn’t


...bottled water is a commodity that sums up a lot about the consumer culture we live in. Bottled water does have a use value, but that has been masked by false needs through advertising, language, semiotics and marketing. As Lury points out “all material possessions carry meaning” (1996: 13). A water bottle is no longer just a water bottle; it is a social indicator of class, gender or age, it can be viewed as a display of environmental ignorance to some or attentiveness to health and beauty to others. The most important aspect of the water bottle is that it is shrouded in myth, you no longer buy a bottle, you buy a lifestyle. 


Safety, Freshness, Beauty etc etc...


http://jadestroudwatts.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/116/


(who owns the dream/myth?)
At the same moment the commercial message adds value to the product it devalues the natural resource... we are encouraged to see the natural resource/communal resource as "not good enough"   

In the case of  the universal natural resource of "random expressive flow" (assuming it has some inherent value) it could be argued this has been devalued/obscured to the point where is it associated with  irrelevance/madness... in our culture....( where it hasn't been reified onto a form of consumption) in the service of the products of instrumental rationality with which the "normal" and "successful" in our culture surround themselves .... and which  street gangs,  andour armies fight for...




`(Contrast with communicative rationality)

Deterritorialization, Performative Identity :Ana Mendieta

‘‘[m]y art is grounded in the belief in one Universal Energy which runs through everything from insect to man, from man to spectre, from spectre to plant, from plant to galaxy’ (Viso, 2004:35), she refered to the fluidity of becoming. The body transformed into earth, water and fire is the aesthetic embodiment of becoming in Mendieta’s art.

In this paper, the works of a woman artist who got inspiration from nature, body and myths have been analysed in the light of some philosophical concepts. Butler’s approach to gender was useful to understand Mendieta’s drag performances. Blocker’s interpretation of Butler’s performative identity was reconsidered with a new look through the glasses of Deleuze and Guattari’s becoming (becoming minor/

molecular/woman/animal/plant). The relation between deterritorialization, becoming, and lines of flight in Mendieta’s art helped us expose the liberating elements. Deviating from Rogoff’s approach to deterritorialization in a cultural and historical perspective, deterritorialization was taken to a conceptual and existential level as the concepts of body, woman and land were also deterritorialized. In addition, Mendieta’s exile was analysed with Kristeva’s understanding of foreigner and the uncanny. It was demonstrated how the uncanny can lead to freedom using Deleuzian terminology of line of flight and becoming. As a result, besides going beyond Blocker’s and Rogoff’s analysises, we displayed how Mendieta’s works transformed the idea of a fixed and coherent identity of the West in the light of Kristeva, Deleuze and Guattari. It is a typical question of hybridity forming a bridge between cultures; however, identity itself can be deterritorialized in a continuous process of nomadhood. In that respect, even today Mendieta sets a good example.

International Congress of Aesthetics 2007 “Aesthetics Bridging Cultures”

Deterritorialization, Performative Identity and Uncanny Representation of Woman‟s Body in the Works of Ana Mendieta

http://www.sanart.org.tr/PDFler/83.pdf

Inherent Creative Ability and Reification

"Are peoples ability to flow/be creative  reduced/limited by ( implicit assumptions used by media)/advertising messages which   (+ normalises passive consumerism (marginalises random expressive flow when sober?) + reifies creative activity and specific identifications onto forms of consumption via overt (celebrity) and subtle ( assumption) means?)


If so can this mystification be unpacked/deconstructed in the viewers mind by the use of the Context Frame?