Re: From Knowledge Animals to Information Beings

Onar Aam (onar@HSR.NO)
Wed, 17 May 1995 20:08:32 +0100


>
> I think that the metaphor of "knowledge animals" has power in
> regions (perspectives) far away from the regions of the human
> mind and our society (without becoming ghost knowledge).
> I think that we can "recognize" the activity of "knowledge
> animals" in our body organs, in biological cells, in plain
> chemistry, in the atomic and sub-atomic interactions and
> much more.

Hello Luc, I'm glad to see that the idea of "knowledge animals" is being
developed in so many diverse directions. The idea of knowledge animals embedding
the entire universe, even the laws of physics is not hostile to me. I have
earlier played with the idea that electrons and other atomic particles are such
beings. This idea has also been put forth by the Russian physicist Vladimir
Lewchenko who argues that the electron is a auto-self-canalyzing system and
argues further that a similar auto-self-canalization takes place in ecosystems.
The work in quantum chaos has shown that many quantum mechanical features can be
described by chaotic Newtonian mechanics, suggesting that the micro-cosmos is an
arena of self-organization. I generally consider such organic approaches to the
subatomic to be very promising.
Personally I have developed the knowledge animal in a different, more
specialized direction, namely as "neural animals". That is, organic control
structures embedded and embodied in the mind. I call them mimickers and them as
analogous to genes. (Yes, they are related to memes. Memes and mimickers reflect
each other, but mimickers live only in the mind while memes are only shadows of
the mind.)

Will check out your article which looks truly interesting. If you enjoyed my
perspectivism then I'm sure you will enjoy my latest articles on memetics (in my
homepage) because they heavily build on perspectivistic thinking. The fact that
I have no less than three different definitions of a meme should indicate this.

Onar.