The World of Computer Software/World_Of_Computer_Software-02-387-Vol-3of3.iso/t/thinknet.zip/THINKNET.002

Text File | 1992-03-05 | 85KB | 1,659 lines

j========================START=OF=THINKNET.002=FILE===========================
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|||||||     THINKNET.002 -- YOU MAY DISTRIBUTE THIS VERSION [6]      ||||||||
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


                             /|   .......  ..   ..    .     .        .      .
                           .==|........ ...  ..   ....   .      ....   ..
._____.   . * .     .    / ===|_ _.    ..______________________________......
   |  |   | | |\    |  / ======== |\ ...|  .... |.THINKNET:An Electronic....
   |  |---| | |  \  |< ========== |. \ .|---- . |.Journal Of Philosophy,...
   |  |   | | |    \|  \ ======== |... \| ..... |.Meta-Theory, And Other..
   |  |   | | |     |    \ ====== |.... |____.. |.Thoughtful Discussions....
                           .==|  ........  ..     .... ..      ...     .. .
                             \|    .... ...  ..  ..  . . ..    .          .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MARCH 1992                       ISSUE  002               VOLUME 1   NUMBER 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thinknet is a newsletter about cooperative philosophical thought in cyberspace,
both on Bulletin Board Systems and on the Networks.


*CONTENTS*

PUBLICATION DATA
ON PROBLEMS WITH THE RECENT TEST MESSAGE
EDITORIAL:  Thinknet Progress
PAPER RESOURCES
   Journal Of Ideas E. MORITZ
   Book Review: Mirror Worlds K.D. PALMER
   Quaterman Newsletter
CYBER RESORUCES
   Objectivism in Cyberspace B.J. KRAWCHUK
   Principia Cybernetica Project & Mailing list C. JOSLYN & F. HEYLIGHEN
CYBER DISCUSSIONS
   Wittgenstein: On Certainty P. CASH
   Old English and Philosophy K.D. PALMER
FEEDBACK




<<<<<<<<<<<<Thinknet Electronic Newsletter (c) 1992 Kent Palmer.>>>>>>>>>>>>>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLICATION DATA                                                         kdp
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope*

Thinknet is a review of philosophical debates and discussions that
are ongoing and enabled by computer mediated communications.  Any
meta-theoretical exchanges that border on philosophy or Systems Theory
that are carried out on the global networks or Bulletin Board Systems are of
interest. All thoughtful discussions within the cyberspace medium are
considered relevant, especially those with an interdisciplinary character.

*Subscriptions & Submissions*

Thinknet is an occasional publication available in both electronic
and hard copy versions.

Thinknet is available electronically from the following:

        The WELL BBS
        (The Philosophy Conference)
        27 Gate Five Road
        Sausalito, CA 94965
        modem 415-332-6106        voice 415-332-4335

        GEnie BBS
        (Religion and Ethics Bulletin Board -- Philosophy category)
        GEnie Client Services 1-800-638-9636


You may subscribe electronically to Thinknet by e-mailing to the following
address:

        [e-mail]


Hardcopy subscriptions are available at a nominal cost to cover postage
and handling.  Write the editor for the current rates at the following address:

        Kent Palmer
        PO BOX 8383
        ORANGE CA 92664-8383
        UNITED STATES


Thinknet invites individuals to submit information, articles, and news
for possible inclusion.  Send submissions to the same electronic or postal
addresses that appear immediately above for subscriptions.

If you would like to become a correspondent reporting on developments on a
particular mailing list or bulletin board please apply.  We would like to
provide summaries of ongoing developments from time to time.

Thinknet will mention items it receives that are within its scope
and when appropriate, review them.  Electronic newsletters, BBS services,
books, mailing lists, works in progress, are all of interest.

Individuals interested in participating in the preparation
and dissemination of this journal are encouraged to apply to the Thinknet
address above.

We are a particularly interested in identifying Bulletin Board
systems where philosophical discussion is carried out in a
focused manner, i.e. where philosophy has its own category.
Inspiration for the format and design of this electronic journal is taken from
the ARTCOM electronic art's related newsletter located on the WELL.

Thinknet may be distributed freely in electronic form.  It
should be considered as shareware.  Thus the copyright notice must be preserved
and the text copied in its entirety without changes.  It is not allowed for
anyone to charge for Thinknet newsletter except the original producer.

Thinknet newsletter copyright 1992 Kent Palmer.  All rights are reserved.  It
may be not be distributed in paper form without permission of the copyright
holder.  Single paper copies for personal study are allowed to be printed.

*Staff*

EDITOR

Kent D. Palmer   -> [e-mail]

CORE GROUP

Peter Cash       -> [e-mail]
Stephen Clark    -> [e-mail]
Richard Coburn   -> [e-mail]
Richard Dunn     -> [e-mail]
Lance Fletcher   -> [e-mail]
Elan Moritz      -> [e-mail]
Mark Peterson    -> [e-mail]
Frank Schroth    -> [e-mail] (copy editor)
Bruce Schuman    -> [e-mail]
Clifford Steward -> [e-mail]
Jeff Dooley      -> [e-mail]


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ON PROBLEMS WITH THE RECENT TEST MESSAGE                                 kdp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The recent test message to the entire thinknet list revealed some problems.

In the last test there were four messages intended for the list owner only
that were sent to the entire list by mistake.  Of course, this quite rightly
caused a deluge of complaints.

This brings out two points that need to be considered:

1) Thinknet is an experiment and as such things will probably go wrong.  The
mailserver that I am dealing with is not very sophisticated and I really
cannot control these bogus messages unless you cooperate with me.  The source of
the problem is incompatabilities between mail programs.  A few mail programs
place the wrong thing in the wrong field from the point of view of other mail
programs.  The solution is just a matter of being aware of the problem and
everyone on the list taking steps to avoid it in the future.  I am talking to my
sysops on what might be done to shore up this loophole but at the moment the
only way that it can be avoided is if you avoid sending the wrong type of
message header.

2) Everyone needs to learn to interact with the thinknet list properly.  Make
sure that your mail reply program does not put 'thinknet-send' in the carbon
copy field.  The best thing is not to use automatic reply.  Send your reply
e-mail message to '[e-mail]'.  It is only messages with
the wrong instruction in their header that are distributed to everyone.  Only
four people had the incompatible mailers that caused this problem.  You did not
get all the messages that were sent to the list in reply.  Those messages that
were received by everyone were the handful that slipped through because of
software incompatabilities.

Steps will be taken in attempt to assure that as few of these
problems occur as possible.  But given my lack of control due to the
unsophisticated nature of the mailserver I am working with I cannot guarantee
that bogus messages will not be distributed from time to time as a fluke
of incompatible software.  I hope you will bear with us on this score and
weigh these inconveniences against the greater good of what we are
trying to do here with thinknet.

If you received this copy of the newsletter directly at you email address,
then you are subscribed and will receive all future issues until you
unsubscribe. To unsubscribe just send an UNSUBSCRIBE message to the list with
your name and email address.

If you are subscribed then you should have received the first issue by now.  If
not please let me know.  Those who responded to the test message that they had
not received the first issue have already been sent new copies.

All duplicates should have been eliminated.  If you receive a duplicate of this
second issue please let me know.

I would like to give a special thanks to those who attempted to warn others
that they were sending their messages to the list in the wrong way.  There were
some subscribers that attempted to contact each person who inadvertently sent
their message to the whole list in order to tell them what they were doing wrong.
Others attempted to warn the whole list because they thought everybody was
receiving all messages sent to the list.  This displayed valor above and beyond
the duty of any mailing list subscriber.  Thank you for your attempts to help us
all out of that unfortunate predicament.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
THINKNET PROGRESS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Thinknet journal has been an interesting experiment.  Most of the core
group agree that it was premature going to press, as many errors in the first
issue attest.  However, it functioned well as a barometer of the level of
interest in philosophical topics that exists among travelers of our electronic
highways.  There is quite a bit.  The current list of subscribers is over 2000
and still growing.  I personally find that pretty amazing, considering I was
only expecting 100 - 500 subscribers at most.  I wish to thank you for your
forbearance and encouragement.

This issue also shows some of the responses by those sending notices of their
activities.  As bait for learning what is going on out there on the internet
the newsletter has worked very well.

Thinknet was advertised on about 30 Usenet newsgroups and a large group of
mailing lists.  The day I posted my first notices it was around midnight and
I immediately got subscriptions from Australia.  Then as the earth spun I
continued to get subscriptions from other countries before the first
subscription came in from the United States.  This was totally different from
what I expected and impressed on me the global nature of any undertaking on the
Internet.  I invite those from other countries outside the United States to
participate and let us know what is happening in your respective countries.
The thought space which we are accessing is truly global in proportions and
this is an important fact that we should all keep in mind.

Another point of importance is the nonacademic nature of Thinknet.  Many of
the initiatives on internet are of an academic nature.  However, Thinknet is
not restricted by the concerns of academia and hopes to encourage nonacademic
thinkers and independent scholars to interact with each other and their
academic counterparts.  The internet is a new publishing medium that is not
restricted as many academic journals have become.  However, people are not yet
used to considering the internet a publishing medium.  Thinknet wants to help
define the standards of this new publishing medium and help facilitate the
sharing of ideas in a more unprocessed form.  Raw ideas are usually not
considered the appropriate material for Journals.  On the other hand non-
academics who have no pressure to publish normally do not consider it worth
while to spend time making all the preparations necessary to make their
thoughts available through journals.  Thus there is silence from the non-
academic community and on the other hand the academics appear to be forced
to publish whether they have anything to say or not.  Thus the essential matter
for conversations on internet are Raw Ideas.  The academics might share here
their wilder ideas that may never see print otherwise and the nonacademics
might share their perhaps not completely worked out or justified thoughts.
In any case Thinknet hopes you will share your ideas within the Thinknet
community.

Anything we receive that has merit from our own editorial viewpoint will be
presented in the feed back section of the newsletter.  By making comments on
Thinknet or other related subjects you can perhaps stimulate others of like
mind inside or outside the university system to respond to you.

Thinknet is evolving.  It started as an experiment with a certain premise which
perhaps expected too much to happen too soon.  The reaction to that first
issue made it clear that the concept of what Thinknet is must change somewhat
in order to be in line with the current situation on the network.  Some of
those changes are as follows:

Thinknet seems to be evolving into a consortia of mailing list moderators.
It seems that the active people on the net tend to have mailing lists.
A good number of the people who volunteered to be part of the core group were
of this sort.  They are looking for some way to advertise their activities and
Thinknet seems like a perfect vehicle.  This seems like a good thing because
these are exactly the people who are likely to know if something new comes
along which we can report to you in the newsletter.  In this way the mailing
list owners get to make their lists more widely known and you get the benefit
of a wider filter to catch new and interesting things that might turn up on
the network.

Any one can be part of the core group who wants to become involved in the
production of the newsletter.  The core group receives everything that comes
into Thinknet along with my comments and responses.  This group makes
suggestions and hopefully will eventually write some of the material to be
included in the newsletter.  In fact, if Thinknet is to survive, writers must
emerge to make contributions to the newsletter.  If you are interested in
joining the core group drop me a line.

The focus of Thinknet seems to be shifting toward attempting to address
the problem of how to have in depth conversations about philosophy on the
network.  It seems that this is difficult to do and so many people give up
due to the inability to find people who have complementary knowledge and
interests.

Thinknet will act as a philosophical matchmaker.  If you send biography/
interest files to Thinknet saying what your background is and what you are
interested in and what you would like to discuss, these will be posted together
in a file which any member of Thinknet can down load and use to look for people
interested in the same thing.

One problem that has come up is that the amount of activity related to
philosophy on the internet is limited.  Although we have enough material
for at least one more issue, the material for further issues may take some
time to collect.  Therefore, Thinknet will continue to be published on an ad hoc
and occasional basis.  When enough material is available, new issues will be
published.

Cyberspace is at its core a 'thoughtSpace'.  At the moment it is unstable,
existing only as flows of information from mailing list or Usenet news
sources.

It is not yet a LANDSCAPE you can navigate through as the future of cyberspace
is often pictured.  However, we do not need the the technological
implementation of the virtual landscape in order to develop the thoughtSpace
which the future landscapes will represent.  The thoughtSpace may be pictured
as the requirements for the implementation of cyberlandscapes in the future.
In  fact a single thoughtSpace may be implemented in many different
cyberlandscapes.  The cyber-landscape adds an architectural and artistic
dimension to the basic reflective process of the thoughtSpace.  What we need to
be working on are these requirements, on the essential nature and organization
of the thoughtSpace that is the pivot of the future cyber-landscapes.  That is
the structure of intersubjective, dialectical, dialogic, mutually reflective,
thought in cyberspace.  The thoughtSpace is a global conversation.  How do we
find the right people to talk to.  How do we collaborate on mutual works.  How
do we sustain conversations and get them to go in worthwhile directions.  How do
we make the results known.  How do we get an overview of the entire
thoughtSpace.  These are the issues that I would like to see the Thinknet
community address together.

But perhaps you have other and better ideas.  Lets share our ideas as a
community exploring together the implications of the thought space and how it
might be embodied in cyberspace.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOURNAL OF IDEAS - Aims and Scope                               Elan Moritz
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Journal of Ideas
                                ________________

                               Tables of Contents

        ISSN 1049-6335,  [(c)] The Institute for Memetic Research, Inc.
                        Panama City, Florida, 32406-1327
   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Volume 1 #1                                                September 1990
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Moritz, E. [Institute  for Memetic Research,  Panama City, Fl.],  MEMETIC
   SCIENCE: I - GENERAL INTRODUCTION, pp. 3-23.

   Bonner, J.  T.  [Dept. of  Ecology  and Evolutionary  Biology,  Princeton
   University, N.J.], CULTURAL EVOLUTION: A Biologist's View, pp. 24-34.

   Brooks, D. R. and  D. A. McLennan [Department  of Zoology, University  of
   Toronto], SEARCHING FOR  A GENERAL  THEORY OF  BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION,  pp.
   35-46.

   Wiley, R. A. [Biobalance Services, Panama City, Fl.], THE METABOLIC ROOTS
   OF CONSCIOUSNESS, pp. 47-53.

   Salthe, S. N. [Biology Department, Brooklyn College, CUNY, N.Y.],  SKETCH
   OF A  LOGICAL DEMONSTRATION  THAT THE  GLOBAL INFORMATION  CAPACITY OF  A
   MACROSCOPIC SYSTEM MUST BEHAVE  ENTROPICALLY WHEN VIEWED INTERNALLY,  pp.
   54-59.

   Henson, H. K. and A. Lucas [San Jose, Ca.], MEMES AND CREATIONISM, pp.
   60-63.
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Volume 2 #1                                                  January 1991
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------

   EDITORIAL: NEWS, VIEWS, STATUS & PLANS, pp. 1-2.

   Lynch, A. [Warrenville,  Il.], THOUGHT CONTAGION  AS ABSTRACT  EVOLUTION,
   pp. 3-10.

   Lumsden, C. [Department of Medicine, University of Toronto], CULTURE AS A
   SEMANTIC FRACTAL: SOCIOBIOLOGY AND THICK DESCRIPTION, pp. 11-18.

   Witten, M. [Center  for High Performance  Computing, University of  Texas
   System, Austin], MODELING THE  DISTRIBUTION OF A "MEME"  IN A SIMPLE  AGE
   DISTRIBUTION POPULATION: I  . A  KINETICS APPROACH  AND SOME  ALTERNATIVE
   MODELS, pp. 19-25.

   Heylighen, F. [Free University of Brussels], C. Josslyn [Systems  Science
   Dept. SUNY  Binghamton], and  V. Turchin  [Computer Science  Dept.,  City
   University  of  New  York],  A   SHORT  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE   PRINCIPIA
   CYBERNETICA PROJECT, pp. 26-29.

   Moritz, E. [Institute for Memetic Research, Panama City, Fl.], BRAIN  AND
   MIND: THE ULTIMATE GRAND CHALLENGE, pp. 30-32.
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Volume 2  #2/3                                           April/July  1991
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Locke, J. [United Kingdom],  OF IDEAS, pp. 33-47.

   Maurer, B.  A. [Zoology  Dept.,  Brigham Young  University]  and   D.  R.
   Brooks, D.   [Zoology Dept.,  University of  Toronto],   ENERGY FLOW  AND
   ENTROPY PRODUCTION  IN BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS, pp. 48-53.

   Moritz, E. [Institute for  Memetic Research, Panama City,  Fl.],  ON  THE
   ROAD TO  CYBERNETIC  IMMORTALITY:    A  Report  on  the  First  Principia
   Cybernetica Workshop, pp. 54-58.

   Barkow,  J.  H.  [Sociology  and  Social  Anthropology  Dept.,  Dalhousie
   University],   THE ORIGINS OF THE CAPACITY FOR CULTURE, pp. 59-62.

   Barkow,  J.  H.  [Sociology  and  Social  Anthropology  Dept.,  Dalhousie
   University],    FOLK PSYCHOLOGY, FREE WILL AND EVOLUTION, pp. 63-66.

   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           JOURNAL of IDEAS
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Editors                                   Editorial Advisory Board
   _______________                           _____________________________

   Elan Moritz                                R. W. Clouse, Vanderbilt U.
   Patricia S. Smith
   The Institute for Memetic Research         Peter Kiss, Sentar Corp.,
                                              Huntsville

                                              Terry M. Mikiten, U. Texas
                                              Health Science Center, San
                                              Antonio

                                              Matthew Witten, Center for
                                              High Performance Computing,
                                              U. Texas System, Austin

   --------------------------------------------------------------------------
           manuscripts and information requests should be directed to
                Dr. Elan Moritz (E-mail:  [e-mail])
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     **  AIMS &  SCOPE  **   The Journal of Ideas  is an archival  (print)
     forum  dedicated  to  the  dissemination  of  research  results   and
     discussion relating to the formation and spread of ideas in human and
     machine systems.  Areas covered  include: 1) dynamical and structural
     theories of idea and  meme generation, mutation, combination,  spread
     and dissolution, 2) knowledge generation, representation, and storage
     in living and artificial systems, 3) cognition and self-awareness  in
     living and  artificial  systems  4)  generalized  theories  of  life,
     evolution, and  ecology  in  biological,  mechanical  and  electronic
     systems, 5) classical and  quantum mechanical theories of  brain/mind
     interactions, 6) human  and   machine creativity and,  7) results  of
     experiments in the preceding areas.   The Journal publishes  research
     communications, critical  reviews,  short notes,  book  reviews,  and
     relevant historical material.   The  Journal is geared  to a  diverse
     audience coming from classical disciplines such as physics,  biology,
     evolutionary  and  ecological   studies,  psychology,   anthropology,
     computer science, mathematics, and philosophy.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Journal of Ideas appears quarterly.

   Ordering information  for  US  and  Canada:  personal  subscriptions  are
   $46/year, institutional  subscriptions  are $138/year.  Back  issues  are
   available [while supply  lasts] at  $26/issue. Make checks  [drawn on  US
   banks] payable  to the  Institute  for Memetic  Research, PO  Box  16327,
   Panama City, Florida 32406-1327. Credit card subscriptions are  available
   through   EBSCO    Subscription   Services,    (201)-387-2660.    Foreign
   subscriptions are available at higher rates.

............................................................................
NOTES ON THE JOURNAL OF IDEAS:                                          kdp

I was sent two review copies of this journal from Elan Moritz.  From these
it is clear that the journal has an academic bent with equations sprinkled
here and there to prove the point that there really is memetic science.
The journal itself is a rare find since it is not in any of the libraries
I have access to here in Southern California.  It is something I would have
never have heard of if it had not been for my connection to the cyberspace
medium.  This is just one key example of how my horizons have been greatly
expanded by participation in the networks and BBSs.

To clarify, the whole 'idea' is to produce a fertile analogy between GENES
and IDEAS.  Memes are Ideational GENES which have a life of their own within
culture.  The best example is a slogan (Don't worry; Be happy.) which
spreads like wild fire throughout a culture apparently by self replication
within the 'minds' of the people, who almost without thinking, take up and
promote the idea.

"Initially the core program of memetics is to demonstrate that:

1) ideas (memes) develop according to certain predictable rules,

2) culture transmission and spread of ideas of all types (in particular,
scientific ideas) embody these rules,

3) there is a distinct similarity of evolution of meme building blocks to that
of genetic building blocks (which raises the obvious question of whether
language structure is controlled by human genetic structure), and

4) new, unanticipated language and meme structures, can possibly already do,
exist." [Elan Moritz "Memetic Science: I - General Introduction", Journal
of Ideas Vol 1 #1 Page 14]

This core program should be of considerable interest to the thinknet community.
This is because we are concerned with the spread of ideas in the new medium
of cyberspace.  If ideas develop according to predictable rules and these carry
over to the cyberspace medium then this would be an important consideration.

But of course the question is raised whether ideas develop in the same ways
in all media.  Marshal McLuhan made the important point long ago that different
media function differently shaping the information they carry.  So we might
ask how cyberspace will shape the information it will carry.  The concept of
meme as 'genetic idea' is an important analogy.  But, however far we can go with
this analogy the fourth point, it seems to me, is the crucial one.  The genetic
concept suggests that ideas mutate and evolve producing novel combinations.
In cyberspace we might expect this genetic mixing of ideas to heat up as
one becomes more and more involved in discussions with others.  Discussions
that may be impossible in the Real World due to physical separation or expense
will suddenly become possible.  Instead of interacting with the dead text of
books we are suddenly confronted with live texts and are engaged in a kind
of Turing test every time we participate in an on-line conversation.  Today
we assume our interlocutors are other people.  Can we continue to assume that
in the future?  Will there be knowbots in the future who are specifically
designed to mix ideas of different people in order to attempt to synthesize new
ideas?  Are we not simulating such knowbots today ourselves as we take
positions on several unrelated mailing lists and inadvertently attempt to
make sense of all the divergent messages we are receiving?

The Journal of Ideas is printed.  But it is perhaps a new genre of printed
materials which are spun off the world network attempting to understand it's
dynamics.  In this way we can appreciate its academic nature.  The networks and
BBSs which make up the world enveloping MATRIX are going to become an object
of study in itself.  Already the flora and fauna of electronic journals are
being collected and studied.  A whole industry of Ph.D. Dissertations is
not far over the horizon when the academics begin to study the networks and
what happens here in earnest.  This journal is setting out on the right track
by studying the proliferation of ideas.  Hopefully some of its articles will
focus on the proliferation of ideas in cyberspace.  And perhaps eventually
there will be articles about how ideas changed their nature when they entered
this new medium.

I think the Journal of Ideas is a good place to watch for those new kinds of
memes to taking shape.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK REVIEW ------ MIRROR WORLDS David Gelernter                         kdp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MIRROR WORLDS

or the Day Software Puts the Universe in a Shoebox . . .
How It Will Happen and What It Will Mean

David Gelernter

(New York Oxford University Press 1991)
[91-19178 QA76.754.G45 ISBN 0-19-506812-2]

CONTENTS

1 Mirror Worlds?
2 The Orb
3 Disembodied Machines
4 Space, Time, and Multi-time
5 The Deluge
6 Simple Mind Machines
7 Building Mirror Worlds

REVIEW

I think this is an important book.  In preparation for this issue
of the newsletter I have been surveying the literature
on cyberspace, virtual reality, etc.  And this book strikes
a lot of chords missing in most of that literature.  One of the
major chords it strikes is the relation of cyberspace to the
REAL world.  MIRROR WORLDS is a vision of what that relation
WILL soon become.  Other authors seem to be making the most of
the fact that virtual reality is undetermined by the REAL world
and can become anything we want it to become unconstrained by
our preconceptions.  This is true.  But on the other hand besides
entertainment there must be some reason for developing the
cyberscape and the means of access to various virtual realities.
These reasons are of course going to have to make economic sense.
Gelernter has focused on the fundamental reason which makes the
most economic sense.  Virtual worlds must mirror the REAL world
and in so doing add value that would not be possible without
these cybernetic shadows.  He calls this subclass of virtual
worlds MIRROR WORLDS.  He does a good job in giving a vision of
how they will work while at the same time pushing his own
brand of Computer Science paradigms for how to accomplish this
end.  Gelernter has also published an excellent book on
programming languages called PROGRAMMING LINGUISTICS which makes
his own language LINDA the end point in the evolution of
programming languages.  Now LINDA is the key to making Mirror
Worlds work as well.  This clever self-advertisement would
perhaps put us off if the wrap around concepts were not just as
good if not better than LINDA itself.  The wonderful thing about
Gelernter's works is that he is thinking deeply about what
programming should and can be as well as what the ultimate
product which will be produced.  That ultimate product he sees as
the Mirror World.

I recommend this book.  It may tell you more than you wanted to know
about programming languages and how they work, but a real attempt
has been made by the author to make that digestible by almost anyone.
It should fill in an important variable in your thinking about
cyberspace and its possibilities.  At least it did for me.


COMMENT

Having read Mirror Worlds I started thinking about its relation
to what we are trying to do with thinknet.  First I realized that
Tom Grundner's National Public Telecommunications Network of
local community based Freenets might be a natural platform for
the establishment of community mirror worlds.  A natural corollary
to the effort to structure cyberspace is the move to get
universal access to it.  Here in Orange County we have a committee
attempting to establish a Freenet.  We are just now getting
started but other cities are already on-line or will be soon
giving free public access to internet.  In fact I attended a
meeting of NPTN for the western states and met Mr Grundner
some weeks ago.  He believes his endeavors are about to take off
as many new communities are getting on line.  The key to a Freenet
is that the BBS menu structure mirrors the community which it
serves.  This means it is a rudimentary Mirror World.  So
Gelernter's vision is already occurring on a small and primitive
scale and his book shows where NPTN might evolve in the future.
The key idea for me in NPTN is the concept of cybercasting.  This
means that high quality information packets are produced and sent
to all the network affiliates.  This means that the quality of
information will improve here on internet and the connection to
the local community will be established to make that information
generally available.  It is no good having an information super-
highway with only a few on and off ramps or a highway for which we
are lacking the a means of sifting out the good material that it
carries from the garbage.

Let us consider the mirror world.  Mirrors have two sides.  Alice
visited the other side of the Mirror when she went to Wonderland.
Wonderland is like the virtual realities which are independent of
the constraints of the REAL world.  Thus we really have
WonderWorlds (non-homeomorphic freeform cyberspace/virtual
realities) and MirrorWorlds (homeomorphic constrained
cyberspace/virtual realities).  One represents the mirror surface
itself and the other represents what lies beyond the mirror
surface.  The real world stands over and against the mirror as
what is reflected in the mirror world and what is distorted and
violated in the WonderWorld.  Both the Mirror and Wonder Worlds
have meaning by their ever evolving relation to the REAL world
beyond the computer screen.  [These distinctions might remind
someone of the relation between the Imaginary, Symbolic and Real
of Jacques Lacan.  (cf. _ECRITS_ New York: W.W. NORTON, 1977)]

However, these distinctions leave out the process of REFLECTION
itself.  In the analogy with the mirror there is either true or
distorted reflection of the REAL images.  But reflection is
exactly the role of thought in the western tradition.  Thus the
question becomes: how does the reflection take place?  I am calling
this the thoughtSpace.  It is the prototype lens through which
the relations between the Mirror World and the Wonder World take
place.  It is this lens that those interested in philosophy must
undertake to establish.  The thoughtSpace does not need either
Mirror or Wonder worlds to exist in order to be explored.  The
thoughtSpace is the way we intend to think using Mirror Worlds
and WonderWorlds about ourselves, reality, existence, morality,
society, the global community and myriad other subjects.  In fact
the thoughtSpace should be developed independently of either
implementation as concrete virtual worlds.

Thinking has normally been isolated before.  We have normally
thought alone or in small groups about issues and problems that
have no answers but only raise ever more questions.  Now we have
the opportunity of thinking together.  We need to consider how we
are going to reflect together through this medium and use the
Real, Mirror, and Wonder worlds to aid our mutual reflection.  Of
course those who are building Mirror Worlds and Wondrous Virtual
Realities are not going to await our deliberations.  But we are
the ultimate responsible users of the whole technology because
by inclination we will be thinking about the issues it raises, and
how we are transformed by it.  We are the keepers a crucial
missing ingredient.  The reflection on the reflections between the
Imaginary, Symbolic and Real.

Thus I suggest we set out to explore the relation between the
lens of the ThoughtSpace and the three worlds, in front of; in
and behind the mirror.  It is my suggestion that the later three
without the former will be as empty as commercial TV, RADIO, and
FILM.  The analogy with Public TV and RADIO used by Tom Grundner
is appropriate.  We see in that medium various attempts to bring
thought provoking programs to the Public.  But in those media
there is only the surface of the Monitor, Speaker, or Screen.  The
surface is a barrier preventing response.  In this new medium the
screen is bidirectional.  Myriads of independent broadcasters
attempting to find the right targets for their messages and
looking for high quality messages they themselves desire.  So here
there is that same extra ingredient that creates quality which
commercial enterprises rarely capture.  Only in this case there is
no central control.  It is a matter of setting up a process by
which we think together through our personal publishing over the
internet.  We need to build the town square, the cafes, and other
gathering places to facilitate that conversation and that process
of mutual deliberation that will give depth to this new medium.

                       RealWorld
                           o
                          /|\        __________Conceptual Tetrahedron
                        /  |  \     /           ala B. Fuller 'Minimal System'
                      /    |    \./             (See SYNERGETICS vol. 1)
                    /      |      \
    MirrorWorld o /........|........\ o WonderWorld
                  \        |        /
                    \      |      /
                      \    |    /
                        \  |  /
                          \|/
                           o
                       ThoughtSpace
                     Lens of Reflection

The thoughtSpace is the point of interaction between the three worlds
where they are mutually reflected.  That reflection needs to be thoughtful
intersubjective consideration of the issues raised in each as they
reflect each other.  The Principia Cybernetica Project is a good example
of an attempt to establish such a vortex of mutual reflection.  They see
it as the ongoing, open ended development of a systems philosophy through
dialogue and the construction of a hypertext conceptual network.  This is one
approach.  Others like the LOJBAN artificial human language mailing list use
language design as the structure that prompts and focuses their discussion.
I believe that the methods by which dialectical/dialogic reflection is pursued
will be multifarious.  The thoughtSpace is the sum total of all these
ad hoc means of group reflection.  Moving from an endless stream of opinions and
information tidbits to group thought is a major transformation which has not
been accomplished by very many groups.  But this is a major transformation which
thinknet hopes to foster and explore.  In fact we may perhaps think of a
series of stages of development of the thoughtSpace within the cyberspace
environment.

0) Opinion, Chit chat, information tidbits

1) Myriad thoughtful conversations between a few individuals.

2) Focused group discussion on a mailing list.

3) Systematic group work using some method to guide discussion.
   For instance the design of a language or the Delphi technique.

4) Reflection or meta-discussion in which the discussion itself is guided
   and changed according to various needs which constrain the group work.

5) Interlocking of discussion groups with various functions into a system
   of faceted group work and reflection.  Here various discussion groups
   would work together on larger issues and problems.  One gets a sense that
   environmentalists use their BBSs and mailing lists in this way.

6) Action networks in which the results of discussion are turned into actions
   that effect the world by being implemented in local but interconnected
   fashion.

7) Global self-consciousness.  The system of group discussion and reflection in
   the thoughtSpace reaches a pitch that one cannot afford to be unconnected
   to the cyberspace medium.  To know what is HAPPENING in the world one must
   be tuned into the global virtual village and listening at the international
   town meeting hall.

When we consider some sort of evolutionary framework such as this, and this
is only a first attempt at constructing such a framework we see that
WonderWorlds, MirrorWorlds, and the designated as RealWorld are now
very separate from each other.  But over time they will become intimately
intertwined.  The entertainment, educational, scientific aspects of the
WonderWorlds will undoubtedly be quickly developed.  The network will
spread throughout the RealWorld and more people will become aware of it's
potential and attempt to realize their own goals in this new environment.
Slowly the potential of MirrorWorlds for corporations will be realized and
they will be built for economic reasons gluing the pieces of the international
corporations together.  This effort will undoubtedly spill over into
governments who will build their own MirrorWorlds.  Through the existence
of the MirrorWorlds the WonderWorlds and the RealWorld will begin to
interact with each other more and more.  Until the frenzy of activity will
be such that there is almost total integration of these now separate functions.
But these worlds, no matter how intertwined, must interact with the human
cognitive activities of the myriads of people that participate with the
global network, or MATRIX, on a daily basis.  This interaction actually occurs
in the ThoughtSpace of group thought and discussion.  As we move toward
what Martin Pawley already described as a PRIVATE FUTURE (Pan 1973) in the
RealWorld we will actually be opening to a virtual public future within
cyberspace.  Long distance Computer Aided Cooperative Work, Many User Dungeons,
Internet Relay Chat, & BBSs are a few examples of the types of public forums
which are the primitive precursors of what will undoubtedly be much more
sophisticated vortexes of interaction in the future.  Most of these
vortices will never get past the zero stage of development in which
the thoughtSpace is merely and unrealized potential.  But within all the
frenzy of activity there will be certain vortices which will start
evolving up the ladder toward self-consciousness.  These self-conscious
vortices of interaction have been described in the Principia Cybernetica
Project as Immortal Meta-subjects.  If they gain stability this may
well appear to be the case.  In this picture, the thoughtSpace would ultimately
be the MetaCognition of these self-conscious vortices of intersubjective
interaction through the cyberspace medium.  That cognition may be very
different from our own.  Probably more like what Marvin Minsky speaks of in
THE SOCIETY OF THE MIND (Simon & Schuster 1986).  An excellent picture of
this kind of ultimate scenario may be seen in Greg Bear's EON (TOR 1986) &
ETERNITY (Warner Books 1988) science fiction novels.

For us the point is not the ultimate scenario, because as with any
emergent phenomena there is likely to be something very different than what we
can imagine.  Instead, the focus of thinknet is on moving up the lower
rungs of the evolutionary ladder for cyberspace discussions.  The
thoughtSpace needs to have a switch board or clearing house by which the
crucial connections are made that allow the discussions to develop.  Thinknet
will attempt to fill this void by considering the thoughtSpace as a whole
looking for the centers of excellence and giving reports on them so
that as many people as possible can join in and perhaps move up
that evolutionary ladder more quickly than would otherwise be possible.


If any of you have additional comments about the book or its
implications I would be happy to hear from you.  Divergent
viewpoints are always welcome.

...........................................................................

Professor Gelernter was kind enough to venture a comment on this review . . .

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 11:27:55 EST
From: David Gelernter <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

By and large, I think KP's comments are right on target (and
I appreciate the good things he says about the book!).

The key point, I think, is the distinction drawn between

  WonderWorlds (non-homeomorphic freeform cyberspace/virtual realities)
  and MirrorWorlds (homeomorphic constrained cyberspace/virtual
  realities).

I've often tried to compress for people the relationship between
mirror worlds and the large domain of virtual realities, cyberspace
and related ideas.  Inventing two distinct-but-related terms, each
equipped with a fairly simple definition, is a very useful and
important step.  People need to understand the real and important
distinctions between "unplugged" and "plugged in" virtual realities or
mirror worlds or cyberspace (i.e., between your "WonderWorlds" and
"MirrorWorlds") without losing sight of the fact that conceptually,
they are two aspects of the same thing.

  We need to build the town square, the cafes, and other gathering
  places to facilitate that conversation and that process of mutual
  deliberation that will give depth to this new medium.

Tremendously important point, I think.  Electronic public squares et.
al. will be the essence of the whole operation, once they exist.
Visualization -- developing a visual sense of joining (or withdrawing
from) a particular group of people -- will be important, as opposed to
the current network-communication experience of random collisions in a
dark room...

  Global self-consciousness.

An interesting term for the ultimate goal.

A minor point: we'd never promote Linda as "the end point in the
evolution of programming languages."  We consider it a "coordination
language"; it's designed only for gluing programs together, not for
building them from scratch.  (Whether we'd describe Linda as "the end
point in the evolution of coordination languages" is another question.
I wouldn't put it past us.)

[Note: For information about what 'coordination languages' are see
the article 'Coordination Languages and their Significance'
by David Gelernter & Nicholas Carriero, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM
February 1992, Volume 35 Number 2. (kdp)]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATRIX NEWSLETTER                                          John Quarterman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the review I gave in the last issue of THE MATRIX it appears that there
were some errors, for which I have apologized to the author.  The gravest of
which was misspelling his name in some copies my newsletter that went out.
Also updates of information in the book occurs through a paper based
newsletter called MATRIX NEWS.  Here is a description of the newsletter
from Mr. Quarterman:

Matrix News is a monthly paper newsletter about contextual issues
related to computer networks; preferably issues that cross network,
organizational, or political boundaries.

The first issue included an article on ``National Network Policy,''
which has been followed by articles such as ``Exactly What is the NREN,''
by Jay Habegger, and by the guest editorials (called Martian Packets)
``Encouraging Equitable Competition on the Internet,'' by Mitchell Kapor,
``Public Institutions in an Electronic Society,'' by Steve Cisler,
``Walking the Beat in the Global Village,'' by Richard Civille.
Steve Jackson's ``The Top Ten Media Errors About the SJ Games Raid''
is also relevant.  The monthly Network Policy Updates have mentioned
the first EARN connection to Moscow and the passing of the NREN bill.
Network policy is not just national, as indicated in R.R. Ronkin's
``Global Cyberspace -- Who Needs It.''

Every issue attempts to draw connections between technology, politics,
and community, ranging from Smoot Carl-Mitchell's ``X.400 - Fact and Fancy,''
to John S. Quarterman's ``Networks from Technology to Community,''
``Boundaries, Resources and the Law,'' ``Which Network, and Why It Matters,''
and ``Analogy is Not Identity.''

We also print reports from networked communities, such as artists in
``Cyber Art: The Art of Communication Systems,'' by Anna Couey or
Billy Barron's ``Libraries on the Matrix'' and ``BBSing Around the OuterNet.''

User and directory services are often covered, with the Martian Packet
``On the Need to Develop Internet User Services,'' by Peter Deutsch
There were MIDS reports on the CNI and NSF Directory Services workshops,
and the articles ``Strategies for Finding People on Networks''
and ``Networks Are Volunteers.''

Issue 5 (August) was a theme issue on K-12 networking,
with articles on KIDSNET, the electronic college classroom,
and specific K-12 networking projects.

Issue 8 (November) examines networks in Argentina in depth
and reviews the program netfind.

Issue 9 (December) has reports on CNRI and CPSR meetings,
and some thoughts on keywords in USENET newsgroups.

Subscriptions are $30 for twelve monthly issues, or $20 for students.
For overseas post, add $10.  Back issues are $4 each.

--
John S. Quarterman
Editor, Matrix News
Matrix Information and Directory Services, Inc. (MIDS)
[e-mail]
[phone]
fax [phone]
701 Brazos Suite 500
Austin, TX 78701
U.S.A.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OBJECTIVISM IN CYBERSPACE                                 Brent J. Krawchuk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reason.  Productivity.  Self esteem.  Liberty.  These are some of the
central themes in Objectivism.  Objectivism is a modern
philosophical movement, formulated by Ayn Rand, that has been
gaining momentum lately in response to problems of big (huge?)
government and intellectual stagnation among our academics.  Some
consider Objectivism to be idle chatter.  Others consider it to be
merely worthless regurgitations of Aristotelianism.  Others are
confused by it after only considering it over lunch one day.  To
others, it evokes images of the high school student who would
carry around "Atlas Shrugged" under her arm, making intolerant
pronouncements about the views of every other person she met (the
infamous "Randroid").  Whatever one thinks of it, it is hard to
deny that this philosophy has a large number of its sympathizers
and promoters taking part in several virtual communities in WorldNet.

THE PHILOSOPHY
--------------

Rand summarized Objectivism with ten words:

      "1. Metaphysics: Objective Reality
     2. Epistemology: Reason
     3. Ethics: Self-interest
     4. Politics: Capitalism".  [1]

She develops a metaphysics in the Aristotelian realist tradition
(and zealously opposes all types of idealism!), creates a novel
theory of concept formation based on reason and volition, upholds
rational egoism, and as a result uncompromisingly defends and
validates laissez-faire capitalism.  She believes that there are,
what she calls, "axiomatic concepts", namely Existence, Identity,
and Consciousness, that are inescapable, which all of her
philosophy ultimately invokes.

Probably the best way to learn about Objectivism is to read about
it.  In December, an important treatise was added to the
Objectivist literature that will find its way into the libraries
of everyone curious or serious about Objectivism.  It is
"Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand" by Leonard Peikoff, the
head of the Ayn Rand Institute, and one of the leading figures in
modern Objectivism.  It is a broad, systematic, though sometimes
under-detailed defense of Rand's philosophy.  The book contains
twelve chapters covering the five branches of Philosophy
(according to Objectivists): Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics,
Politics, and Aesthetics.  Several Objectivists have already
pointed out some of its flaws, and much of the spare time of
students of Objectivism in the next few years will be spent
wrangling with many of the issues that it raises.  Book critiques
have already appeared on some of the mailing lists, one of which,
by net.objectivist Eyal Mozes, is fairly critical.  However, even
Mr.  Mozes contends that this book will be more of a boon for the
development of Objectivism than a problem for it.

Another book that is a must for Objectivism novices, is Rand's
monumental novel "Atlas Shrugged".  I also recommend "The Ayn Rand
Lexicon", a topical collection of passages from her Philosophical
Works and novels, gathered and edited by another important
Objectivist philosopher, Dr. Harry Binswanger.  Of course, those
not on student budgets should probably buy all of the seven
easily available philosophical works of Rand, if they are at all interested.

Once someone has read at least some Objectivist literature, they
should be partially prepared to delve into the Objectivist world
inside their computers.  I say "partially" because they should be
prepared to simply read messages on these mailing lists, but
certainly not to write for them.  Writing messages that are
neither rejected by the moderators nor heavily torn apart (if not
flamed outright) usually takes a fair amount of study and thought.

THE OBJECTIVISM LIST
--------------------

The "objectivism" mailing list, also known as the "Vixie" list,
after it's moderator Paul Vixie.  It started being moderated in
April 1991 after a stretch of intolerable flaming and
inappropriate or irrational posts.  Before then, it was intended to
be a general objectivism list where anything related to
Objectivism could be discussed with the deeper technical
discussions relegated to the objectivism-philosophy list of Bill
Wells.  The latter list, formed as a flame-free alternate to the
main list that had existed before, saw wild swings of activity and
is now "defunct" (says Bill, though he has not made an official
announcement of this.  Now, the Vixie list has evolved into a list
where thinking about the philosophy is central, and in which
essays and long replies to topics are commonplace.

There has been interesting discussion on this list recently about
property (of various types) and the impossibility of conflict of
self-interests.

To join, write a note to Internet address:
    [e-mail]

or  one of the UUCP addresses:
    uunet!vixie.sf.ca.us!objectivism-request
    {decwrl,pacbell,hoptoad,fernwood,asylum}!vixie!objectivism-request
and ask to be put on the mailing list.

THE AYN-RAND LIST
-----------------

The BITNET/CREN LISTSERV AYN-RAND mailing list (a few people call
it the "Rand" list) celebrated its first birthday on Jan 15th.
During that time, the list has struggled to find a niche in the
evolving world of objectivism mailing lists.  At one point,
epistemology was its raison d'etre.  But most other times, the
85-member list remained looking very much like its cousin, the
Vixie list.  Many of its members were also on the Vixie list and so
it was interesting to see times of intense activity alternate
between the two lists, as its members shifted focus.  The list was
at first unmoderated, general format, but upon moderation by the
list owner, Jimbo Wales, the postings suddenly became very
thoughtful and worthwhile.

However, in its second year, all this will change.  Jimbo Wales, its
moderator, has announced and organized chapter-by-chapter studies of
important objectivist works.  In the 10-week "ITOE 1992 Project"
starting mid-January, Rand's "Introduction To Objectivist
Epistemology" will be tackled.  Each week, an appointee will present
an essay on a chapter of the book, and open discussion will follow.
Other projects for the future include a few weeks during the summer of
discussion on invited essays about Objectivism and Artificial
Intelligence, as well as a chapter-by-chapter study of Peikoff's new
book this fall.

To join the "Rand" list, send a message to the LISTSERV at
    [e-mail]
with the body of the message containing the line:
    SUBSCRIBE AYN-RAND [e-mail]
On Bitnet, you may use the command:
   TELL LISTSERV AT UA1VM SUBSCRIBE AYN-RAND your-username@address

THE ELECTRONIC OBJECTIVIST STUDY GROUP
--------------------------------------

Another mailing list is the Electronic Objectivist Study Group (EOSG)
and is managed by Bob Stubblefield.  This list is for serious
subscribers only.  This is apparent once on the list --- the quality of
postings is very high, and some very seasoned Objectivist philosophers
and students are involved.  There is a fee and a set of requirements
that must be agreed upon to join the list.  The Ayn Rand Institute is
supported by EOSG and its subscribers.

Recently, amazingly clear discussions about (the number of) women
objectivists, femininity/masculinity, sexuality, native Americans,
Infinity, and honesty, among others, have appeared on the list.  I am
sometimes awestruck by the razor sharp analysis that is done by these
Objectivists, who always try relate each issue back to Objectivist
fundamentals.

To get information and a contract to join EOSG,

send a message to

    [e-mail]

People who do not consider themselves Objectivists should not
bother to apply to this list.

OTHER SOURCES OF OBJECTIVISM
----------------------------

Unfortunately, there is no objectivism newsgroup on Usenet, though
there were some attempts to get one going a few years ago.
Occasionally, some talk appears in sci.philosophy.tech,
alt.individualism, and talk.philosophy.misc.  Nor is there a group
on Compuserve, though Objectivism occasionally pops up in the
Individualism conference.

Interestingly, there is another list, invitation-only, of about a
dozen Objectivists who review their peers' papers.  The existence
of a list that is advertised only by word-of-mouth makes one
wonder about the possibility of other private philosophical
mailing lists on the Internet.  Perhaps there are even other such
mailing lists for Objectivists.

ThinkNet would be very interested to know of other sources of
Objectivism that its readers know about, so that we might report
on it in future issues.  In particular, it would be interesting to
know about activity in the BBS community.

CLOSING REMARKS
---------------

There is a large amount of activity on the networks involving
Objectivism.  Compare this with, say Wittgenstein philosophy, or
any other singled-out philosophical movement.  Is it perhaps that
users of computers and their networks are more susceptible to the
Objectivist meme? Is it because computer people are often used to
the formulation of clear argument and the use of logic that
Objectivism demands? Or is it because those with a desire to think
deeply about such issues somehow have the desire to get together
with other similar thinkers?

Or is it simply that Cyberspace is starting to take off at about
the same time that Objectivism is coming of age?

Bj

[Thanks to Thomas Gramstad, Bob Stubblefield, Bill Wells,

 Jimbo Wales, and others.]


BIBLIOGRAPHY
------------

Peikoff, Leonard. "Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand",

    Dutton: New York (December, 1991).  493 pages.
    ISBN 0-525-93380-8.

Rand, Ayn. "Atlas shrugged", Dutton: New York (1992) c1957
        1168 pages. ISBN 0-525-93418-9.

Rand, Ayn. "The Ayn Rand Lexicon: Objectivism from A to Z",
    ed. Harry Binswanger, New American Library: New York,

       (1988) c1986. ISBN 0-452-01051-9.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRINCIPIA CYBERNETICA PROJECT --- In a nutshell & about the PRNCYB-L list
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Principia Cybernetica Project (PCP) is a collaborative attempt to
develop a complete and consistent cybernetic philosophy.  Such a
philosophical system should arise from a transdisciplinary unification and
foundation of the domain of Systems Theory and Cybernetics.  Similar to the
metamathematical character of Whitehead and Russell's "Principia
Mathematica", PCP is meta-cybernetical in that we intend to use cybernetic
tools and methods to analyze and develop cybernetic theory.

These include the computer-based tools of hypertext, electronic mail, an
knowledge structuring software.  They are meant to support the process of
collaborative theory-building by a variety of contributors, with different
backgrounds and living in different parts of the world.

PCP is to be developed as a dynamic, multi-dimensional conceptual
network.  The basic architecture consists of nodes, containing expositions
and definitions of concepts, connected by links, representing the
associations that exist between the concepts.  Both nodes and links can
belong to different types, expressing different semantic and practical
categories.

As its name implies, PCP will focus on the clarification of fundamental
concepts and principles of the cybernetics and systems domain.  Concepts
include: Complexity, Information, System, Freedom, Control, Self-organization,
Entropy, Laws of Requisite Variety, of Requisite Hierarchy, and of Regulatory
Models.

The PCP philosophical system is seen as a clearly thought out and
well-formulated global "world view", integrating the different domains of
knowledge and experience.  It should provide an answer to the basic
questions: "Who am I? Where do I come from? Where am I going to?".  The PCP
philosophy is systemic and evolutionary, based on the spontaneous emergence
of higher levels of organization or control (metasystem transitions)
through blind variation and natural selection.  It includes:

 a) a metaphysics, based on processes or actions as ontological primitives,

 b) an epistemology, which understands knowledge as constructed by the
subject, but undergoing selection by the environment;

 c) an ethics, with survival and the continuance of the process of
evolution as supreme values.

   Philosophy and implementation of PCP are united by their common
framework based on cybernetical and evolutionary principles: the
computer-support system is intended to amplify the spontaneous development
of knowledge which forms the main theme of the philosophy.

...........................................................................
The PRNCYB-L Electronic Mailing List

Cliff Joslyn & Francis Heylighen

We are now using the PRNCYB-L mailing list and file server on the BINGVMB
computer system at SUNY-Binghamton in New York.  PRNCYB-L is a LISTSERV
mailing list combining the functions of a message board and a file storage
server.

Purpose

PRNCYB-L provides an open forum for all participants in the project,
allowing interactive discussions about all issues related to PCP.  It will
function as the main medium for theoretical and practical development of
the Project.  The nodes of the conceptual network of PCP will be stored on
the file server and posted to the message board.  The list might also be
used for a kind of electronic "Delphi procedure"(see further in this
Newsletter), or other forms of computer-supported collaborative work .

   A digest, or summary, of the discussions and node development on
PRNCYB-L will be produced, and published in this Newsletter.  It is sent to
all people on our list of potential PCP contributors, including those who
do not have access to electronic mail or who otherwise want only summary
information about the project.

   The mailing list is not meant for idle chattering or uninformative
technicalities.  It is also not meant as a general forum for discussion
about cybernetics and systems science.  Such a forum already exists in the
mailing list CYBSYS-L (contact Joslyn for more information).  Whereas
CYBSYS-L is open to anyone with an interest in cybernetics and systems,
PRNCYB-L is restricted to active participants and those who wish to be
informed about the specifics of PCP.

How does it work?

The functioning of the list is very simple, and does not require any
technical knowledge.  If you are subscribed to PRNCYB-L, you will
automatically and immediately receive all messages sent to the list on your
email address.  In this way the mailing list functions as a "live"
Newsletter about the project, keeping you abreast of conceptual
developments, as well as practical opportunities, such as workshops or
publications.

   Once subscribed, if you wish to contribute yourself, you just send an
electronic mail message to the list address, and it will be automatically
broadcasted to all others who have subscribed.  In that way you can mail out
e.g. questions, proposals, or reactions.

   The third function of PRNCYB-L is the file server.  Files containing
larger pieces of information (e.g. PCP nodes, publications, bibliographies,
logbooks of past discussions) are stored in a central computer.  They can be
requested by any subscriber by sending a simple email command message to
the file server address.  This makes it easy to provide papers or other long
texts to anybody interested, at no cost for us or for you.

Contributing to PRNCYB-L

Participants can best contribute to PCP by posting to PRNCYB-L.  But for
those who cannot use email, we will accept contributions on a diskette
file.  In extreme circumstances, printed contributions will be accepted,
although this is discouraged.

   If you wish to join PRNCYB-L, please send an email note to the address:
[e-mail]

containing the following information:
1)   Name
2)   Email address
3)   Postal address
4)   Phone
5)   Affiliations
6)   How did you hear about PCP?
7)   Do you wish to be a full subscriber to PRNCYB-L, or just receive the Digest?
8)   Please take at least one page to describe your work and how it might
relate to PCP (this is not necessary for people who have contributed to PCP
before).

   You will then be added to the mailing list, and receive initial
instructions on how to operate the LISTSERV software.  Thank you, and we
hope to hear from you soon!

............................................................................

TABLE OF CONTENTS FROM THE PRINCIPIA CYBERNETICA NEWSLETTERS
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
                          Newsletter of the
                   PRINCIPIA CYBERNETICA PROJECT
                         No. 0, November 1990
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WHAT PRINCIPIA CYBERNETICA IS
AN EVOLUTIONARY PHILOSOPHY
  A Process Metaphysics
  A Constructivist, "Metacognitive" Epistemology
  An Evolutionary Ethics
  Form and Content
WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING
  Origin of the Project
  Criticisms
  Recent Activities
WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO
  Workshop
  Book
  Introductory Paper
  Node Development
  Software Architecture
  Hypertext Markup Language
WHAT YOU CAN DO
  Editorial Board
  Contributors
  REFERENCES
  Footnotes:

......................................................................

PRINCIPIA CYBERNETICA Newsletter
edited by F. Heylighen,   No. 1, November 1991

Editorial
Principia Cybernetica in a Nutshell
A Report on the 1st PCP Workshop
The PRNCYB-L Electronic Mailing List
A Note on Technologies for PCP
Electronic Delphi Procedures
Reactions Received
Dictionary of Cybernetics: a work in progress report
A Grant for PCP Research
PCP Publications
Call for Papers: PCP symposium in Namur
WHAT YOU CAN DO
List of Contributors
Editorial Board

.......................................................................

Editorial Board

All inquiries should be directed to the following:

Francis Heylighen
PO, Free University of Brussels
Pleinlaan 2,
B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Cliff Joslyn
Systems Science, SUNY Binghamton,
327 Spring St. # 2,
Portland ME 04102, USA.
Phone/Fax: [phone] (Fax after notice by phone)
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

Valentin Turchin
Computer Science,
City College of New York
New York NY 10031, USA
Email: [e-mail]

............................................................................
NOTE ON Principia Cybernetica Project (PCP) NEWSLETTER AND MAILING LIST  kdp

I find the Principia Cybernetica Newsletters and Mailing list to be very
interesting.  What makes it interesting to me is the attempt to involve others.
The attempt to construct a philosophy in cyberspace.  The fact that the
philosophy is seen as a group construction which is openended and
a continuous work in progress.  It is an excellent example of an attempt
to create a thoughtSpace in which people reflect together.

The newsletters are well written recording real progress in the form of
meetings held and things accomplished.  The newsletter is sent out in hard copy
as well as electronically.  The mailing list is only moderately active.  Elan
Moritz of the Journal of Ideas is active in PCP as well.  Whereas PCP is
attempting to build a specific philosophy in cyberspace, Thinknet, on the other
hand, is a resource for philosophy sources of all kinds in cyberspace.  Thus I
think they are complementary projects.  I wish there were more projects like
PCP happening in Cyberspace to report on and review.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WITTGENSTEIN -- ON CERTAINTY Seminar                             Peter Cash
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am one of the co-organizers of an electronic seminar on Wittgenstein's book,
_On Certainty_.  This seminar takes place in the Usenet newsgroup
talk.philosophy.misc.  We've been going through the book section by section, and
exchanging comments on them.  Right now, we're on section 15.  The seminar started
last July, so we should be finished with the book some time before the end of
the next century 8^}

I've been keeping an archive of the discussions.  We originally chartered the
seminar as a public forum, and I've been distributing the postings via a
mailing list to those who can't receive talk.philosophy.misc.

I encourage you or anyone else interested in the philosophy of Ludwig
Wittgenstein to participate!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN ONGOING DISCUSSION ON OLD ENGLISH AND PHILOSOPHY                        kdp
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have been carrying on a discussion with some Old English (Anglo-Saxon)
Language scholars about the relation between philosophy and the roots of
the English language.  There are about eight packets in this series so far.
Anyone who is interested is invited to join this discussion and request
back packets.

Issues under discussion.

Is there a difference between the writing/speech dichotomy between Old English
and modern discourse?

What is the nature of the pre-ontological disposition of the Anglo-saxons?

How can we study the implicit philosophies in Old English works such as
Beowulf?

Is there anything we post-modern English speakers can learn from our linguistic
forebears?

Is there a difference between the Old English core of our modern English language
which might lead us to view our relation to our environment differently?

To join, send to thinknet an introduction of yourself and a message in
the following form:

JOIN OEPHIL YourFullName <[e-mail]>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEEDBACK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 91 19:17:33 PST
From: [e-mail] (Coni Britten)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re:  thinknet newsletter LONG

Thank you for sending me the first edition of thinknet.  I would very
much like to (continue to) subscribe.

I have no formal (or informal, for that matter) training in philosophy,
so it may be that I would be wiser to be a "listener" for a period of
time before submitting anything.

However, while reading the piece "About Thinknet" (Thinknet vol.1
num.1) I couldn't help thinking about the "Renaissance" of philosophical
thought which took place in Germany and ended with the rise to power of
the Nazis.  It has been said that the Nazi party used people's
ignorance of German philosophers to incite a reaction against them --
Nazis promised "a return to the old values" from the "immorality" of
the "free-thinkers".

Does this modern philosophical Renaissance (which we see being enabled
by the network) foreshadow a similar fate for our current society?
"If this is indeed a possibility, are there any means by which we can
avoid philosophical thought being used in this way again?"

Not wanting to begin this forum on a "down" note, but feeling that this
is not an issue to be ignored or avoided, I have decided to submit this
as a topic for further discussion.


Coni Britten
[e-mail]

............................................................................
Date:         Thu, 21 Nov 91 14:17:33 EST
From: Michael Morse <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Re: thinknet newsletter LONG

Yes, please enter a subscription of *Thinknet* for me. And, perhaps as a way of
getting started, I'll allow myself to improvise a contribution, a letter to the
editor, if you will:

    As a long-time reader and discussant of philosophical texts, I tend to
notice matters of language, both first and last. In the short time I've been
`on-line,' I've already noticed and picked up some of the computer jargon--
using the`*' for word-emphasis, `IMHO,' `flame,' and more. All these are
charming enough, and I not only enjoy slangs, I respect them as part of the
vitality of linguistic life. While we have never had an intellectual prestige-
police in the English-speaking world (such as the Academie Francaise), it is
also fair to say that certain groups bear particular attitudes and, more
important I believe, *responsibilities* with respect to language. From this
perspective, there is no single `correct' attitude towards language, but there
are distinctive burdens. The philosophical community is charged, and charges
itself, with the preservation and development of logic, for example.

     But the linguistic asks of philosophy barely even begin with this (already
weighty) problem. To some, or many, or all, within that amorphous, self-
appointing body falls the task of preserving the language of Plato, Spinoza,
Heraclitus, Descartes, and Plotinus. Though this duty spells exegetical self-
abasement to some, it need not. The critical work of Heidegger or Derrida is
arguably far superior as a means of keeping the tradition alive. And these
writers do not force themselves into the allegedly `correct' modes of existing
philosophical language, finding instead the appropriate conceptual means to
re-think, and thereby keep alive, the tradition they have inherited. Even at
the risk of outrage and incomprehension, they understand their task in this
way, and so attempt to fulfill it.

      With these brief comments, we may return to the problem of computers,
computer users, and their particular language. I think the main question to pose
is this: does the development and "deployment" of computer-slang have an
appreciable impact on the *conceptual* doings of the parties concerned? It
goes without saying that, if this is so, then it is worthy of critical
discussion. If it is *not* so, then perhaps our "ordinary" levels of critical
awareness are sufficient?

     But let's consider some cases: the first issue I have received of Thinknet
 makes frequent mention of a phenomenon called "cybertime"; I can only
presume that this is the characteristic `time' of computer use. Evidently, there
is much to discuss in such a concept, and the word, even if hazily or not at all
defined, intuitively points us all toward a problem worthy of attention.
Unfortunately, it does not appear to me *quite* as simple as: "a particular social
behavior [or, worse still, `technological medium'] `just naturally' finds its own
terminology"--this view produces nihilist-flavoured Girl Scout Cookies. More
cautiously, we can say: the computer has presented its users with a distinct set
of questions, and in coping with them, reflective individuals have tended to
generate terms with as-yet-incomplete definitions. This SOUNDS a lot less pretty
than the  sentence rejected, I'll warrant, but perhaps brings us a little closer
to the truth.

   Another case: perhaps in the throes of `cybertime' enthusiasm, the editors
encourage `meta-theoretical' discussion. The sense of this expression is far
clearer--but disturbing. What the word undoubtedly intends to locate is
`reflection which, taking account of recent transdisciplinary experiences, does
not restrict itself to the canon or terminology of any particular constituted
[academic] discipline.' If this is a fair translation, then the word is both
laudable in its aims and sloppy in its means. `Theory' has *always* meant the
freedom to pursue a problem in whatever direction, and with whatever tools,
required. Both the recent intellectual history, especially French, shows how
widely available this model of theory is--but so, far more powerfully, does the
tradition which gave us the word. Though they don't, admittedly, use the term,
have a look at Anaximander, Heraclitus, or Parmenides. There is nothing hard and
fast about the channels and constitutions of our modes of inquiry; thus, I believe,
we allow neither impatience with immediately visible models on the one hand, nor
understandable overexcitement at the novelty of our present position, to
stampede us into questionable conceptual choices. Is there such a thing as
`meta-theory'? If there is, I doubt very much if the Thinknet community wants
anything to do with it.. what we need is *theory*, with commitment, energy,
and care.

       Michael Morse
............................................................................
Date:         Wed, 18 Dec 91 07:14:09 EST
From: Charles Elliott <[e-mail]>
Subject:      English
To: "kdp (?)" <[e-mail]>
Status: OR

I've just read my first issue of Thinknet. You have, I am sure, the makings
of an interesting project, so please take what I say not as trivial carping
but as a serious and constructive suggestion: EDIT

The English is bad - the writing is dreadful. If you hope to be taken seriously
by educated people, you will have to *sound* like you know what you are doing.
It is *particularly* important in the discussion of philosophical issues to use
language precisely and simply, so it doesn't get in the way of ideas;otherwise
you find you are attempting brain surgery with a mallet.  Well, good luck and
happy netting ! -- Charles Elliott
.............................................................................

From: palmer (Kent D Palmer)
Subject: Re: English -- answer
To: [e-mail] (Charles Elliott)
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 91 2:04:00 EST

Charles Eliot---

Thank you for your feedback. I will agree that my writing leaves a lot to
be desired. Some one has volunteered to be a copy editor for the project so
I am expecting the quality to improve. Also I am hoping others will start
writing so I do not have to embarrass myself quite so much. It was really meant
as an experiment to see if anyone was out there with something interesting to
say. Turns out it was a much bigger success than I anticipated. So we will try
to have a better quality product next time around.

That said . . .  What do you think about content. Anything you would like to
see in it. Have any ideas?? We are just starting to put together the next
issue and now is a good time for suggestions.

---Kent---
...........................................................................


Date:         Thu, 19 Dec 91 07:20:15 EST
From: Charles Elliott <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Re: English -- answer
To: Kent D Palmer <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 19 Dec 91 2:04:00 EST

In this day of flames and counter-flames, of ultra touchy egomaniacs and
self-aggrandizing jerks, I have finally found a modest and sincere
networker who is serious about what he is doing and has enough character
to make something of his ideas. My felicitations, Kent, and I hope you
have a marvelous holiday season.  Yes, I *will* try to come up with a
simple idea or two, though frankly, I am awed by the challenge - our very
best minds have been doing philosophy for two thousand years and haven't really
made a hell of a lot of progress.  -- Cheers, Charles Elliott

............................................................................

Date:         Thu, 19 Dec 91 07:29:26 EST
From: Charles Elliott <[e-mail]>
Subject:      What is progress ?
To: Thinknet submission <[e-mail]>
Status: OR

Though somewhat daunted by the aims of THINKNET, I offer a question and
an example rather than a solution. My question is a simple one, though the
answer to it will not, I am sure, be simple. "What is philosophic progress ?"

Now I will try to give an example - limited and poor - but one which I hope
captures the idea. For years (well...early 1900's...1933-50 specially) linguists
inveighed against including 'meaning' in the first steps of the analysis of
language, which they considered to be highly structured and mechanical..the
analysis of discrete phonological distinctive units, etc. They seemed to do OK
until they tried to work on syntax and grammar. In the mid 50s, Noam Chomsky
demonstrated that syntax could only be truly understood if one accepted the
idea of an underlying structure related to a superficial (spoken or written)
structure by a highly structured and specific rule (one which moved, deleted
or added elements to the original structure).Thus, for example, "The candle
was lit by the man." - had the underlying structure "The man lit the candle."
Immediately all sorts of insights became available, most of which could be
expressed in structured and clearly expressible terms. No bull. Sorry for the
brevity of the example, but I believe that was philosophic progress.

Any result  of Chomsky's insight was expressible, testable and illuminating.
That is, you could express it in unambiguous terms (a rule); you could check
it against a native speaker's knowledge of the language; it applied to many
other (otherwise unpredictable) cases. Are these reasonable tests for
philosophic progress ? If not, why should we reject them and what should we use
to measure philosophic progress ? Thanks for your patience, Charles Elliott

THIS FILE CONTAINS BYTES 84687 WORDS 11972 LINES 1659
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|||||||       THANK YOU FOR READING THE THINKNET NEWSLETTER        |||||||||
|||||||     ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT GIVE WOULD BE APPRECIATED       |||||||||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All opinions expressed herein are purely those of the individual authors.
They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Bulletin Board or Network
Node on which they reside. Thinknet is not an organization but a network
of people continuously communicating via electronic means. Join in. You are
welcome to participate. Remember this is for fun. We won't take ourselves
too seriously if you don't take us, or yourself, too seriously, either.
In other words we will not participate in arguments and exchange of flames.
=========================END=OF=THINKNET=FILE===============================