>> We would then reserve the most complex
>> category for self-referential systems that have a non-simulable
>> semantic component. Will that fly?
Cliff Joslyn writes:
>Sounds good to me. Now try to convince THEM.
Does this mean that the most complex systems are ones which can (1) map
their own internal models, as well as (2) keep some track of external
events on which they do not (yet) have fully adequate information ?
If this is what a complex system means, more or less, what is the problem
in acceptance ?
On the other hand, _the *most complex* category_ might need to add some
capacity for goal-directed reorganization of its own self-referential
systems - i.e. creative restructuring in the pursuit of increased freedom
(e.g.less dependency upon the contingencies of *non-simulable semantic
components*.
Cheers!
Bruce B.