What the Frog’s Eye Tells the Frog’s Brain
Publisher: IEEE

Author(s)
J. Y. Lettvin ; H. R. Maturana ; W. S. McCulloch ; W. H. Pitts

Abstract:
In this paper, we analyze the activity of single fibers in the optic nerve of a frog. Our method is to find what sort of stimulus causes the largest activity in one nerve fiber and then what is the exciting aspect of that stimulus such that variations in everything else cause little change in the response. It has been known for the past 20 years that each fiber is connected not to a few rods and cones in the retina but to very many over a fair area. Our results show that for the most part within that area, it is not the light intensity itself but rather the pattern of local variation of intensity that is the exciting factor. There are four types of fibers, each type concerned with a different sort of pattern. Each type is uniformly distributed over the whole retina of the frog. Thus, there are four distinct parallel distributed channels whereby the frog’s eye informs his brain about the visual image in terms of local pattern independent of average illumination. We describe the patterns and show the functional and anatomical separation of the channels. This work has been done on the frog, and our interpretation applies only to the frog.
Published in: Proceedings of the IRE ( Volume: 47 , Issue: 11 , Nov. 1959 )
Page(s): 1940 – 1951
Date of Publication: Nov. 1959
ISSN Information:
DOI: 10.1109/JRPROC.1959.287207
Publisher: IEEE

via What the Frog’s Eye Tells the Frog’s Brain – IEEE Journals & Magazine

pdf https://hearingbrain.org/docs/letvin_ieee_1959.pdf

pdf reprinted from: “The Mind: Biological Approaches to its Functions”
Editors: William C. Corning, Martin Balaban, 1968, pp 233-258.
CHAPTER 7 https://neuromajor.ucr.edu/courses/WhatTheFrogsEyeTellsTheFrogsBrain.pdf

and

In a Frog’s Eye
A poet at heart, Jerome Lettvin changed our understanding of visual perception.
by Conor Myhrvold
Jan 2, 2013

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/508376/in-a-frogs-eye/

(pdf) https://www.pangaro.com/Past-Future-of-Cybernetics-von-Foerster-BCL.pdf

Full pdf: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2384/d37ee804cfed6b56cc286d407ffec3bcc3b3.pdf?_ga=2.225389854.548608583.1579960117-2042921225.1568038417

via: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1-On-Self-Organizing-Systems-and-Their-Environments-H../2384d37ee804cfed6b56cc286d407ffec3bcc3b3

Full article in html:

ON SELF-ORGANIZING SYSTEMS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENTS
Heinz von Förster
May 5, 1959

   Click here to see all 3 quotes from this document.

An adaptation of an address given at The Interdisciplinary Symposium on Self-Organizing Systems in Chicago, Illinois, originally published in Self-Organizing Systems. M.C. Yovits and S. Cameron (eds.), Pergamon Press, London, pp. 31–50 (1960).

via “On Self-Organizing Systems and Their Environments” by Heinz von Förster (Complete Article)

also:

self-organizationin cybernetics (wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization_in_cybernetics

Self-organizing Systems – Wolfgang Banzhaf Published in Encyclopedia of Complexity,  2009: http://www.cs.mun.ca/~banzhaf/papers/sos.pdf

blog – Heinz von Foerster: Self-Organization as the reduction of entropy in a System (2015) https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/heinz-von-foerster-self-organization-as-the-reduction-of-entropy-in-a-system/

Carcinisation

One of nature’s many attempts to evolve a crab.

Ignorance, a skilled practice
Containment protocol: None. Words can’t hurt you. Words aren’t real. Philosophical ideas don’t affect reality. You won’t notice any changes after reading this. You won’t find yourself, in conversation and in your own thoughts, ceasing to reach for institutionally certified sources of aggregate information of universal applicability. You won’t find yourself reaching instead for personal anecdotes or any tangentially-related connection to your own experience. You won’t gradually cease to expect that positive knowledge exists for new questions you encounter. You won’t notice the words squirming beneath your feet with their sense gelatinized, like cobblestones turned to jellyfish. “Hermeneutic” doesn’t count.

Description: “Ignorance, A Skilled Practice” is a guest blog post written by a literal banana. The banana’s tiny cartoon arms barely span the keyboard, and as a result the banana is only able to press one key at a time with each hand or foot. The blog post is offered here as an example of what bananas can accomplish when given proper access to technology.

Since Harry Frankfurt’s essay taking a rather negative view of bullshit as a category (“On Bullshit,” 1986), some philosophers have attempted to redeem “bullshit” from its negative connotations (see, e.g., Joshua Wakeham, “Bullshit as a Problem of Social Epistemology,” 2017).

What follows is my attempt to articulate the subset of bullshit that I think is bad, because I think most bullshit is good. The skillful practice of ignorance cannot be reduced to the avoidance of bullshit. It would be self-defeating to deprive oneself of bullshit completely, for bullshit is the air we breathe, and we could not learn or accomplish anything without it. Here I try to bring to salience a particular quality of a particular kind of knowledge, such that in recognizing it, much harmful bullshit can be appropriately classified, and a state of skillful ignorance can be maintained.

Continues in source Ignorance, a skilled practice – Carcinisation

One of our foremost current cyberneticians spells out his project.

This is not cognitive science

Cognitive science is the field likely to come to mind if you think about academic studies of everyday thinking and acting. Just as Part I of The Eggplant might be mistaken for philosophy, because philosophy is the field that has mostly studied that Part’s subject matter, Part II might at first be mistaken for cognitive science.

As we go along, it will sound less and less like cognitive science, and you might suppose that it is cognitive science done in a peculiarly bad way, presumably in order to justify false conclusions.

In fact, it is neither cognitive nor science. There is quite a lot to say about this. As a preview:

• “This is not about the inside of your head” explains how and why The Eggplant mostly ignores cognitive mechanisms
• “Accounts, theories, and understandings” answers “what good is this if it isn’t science?”
• “Descriptive and normative theories” explains why Part II does not tell you how you should think
• “This is not a dual-process theory” distinguishes the explanation from some others it may superficially resemble
• “A few things we do know about brains” points out implications of the facts that rationality was invented recently and that neurons are slow
• “Never mind the Church-Turing Thesis” explains why computability theory is irrelevant
• “This is not about folk theories” dispels the possible misunderstanding that The Eggplant aims to explain how people believe reasonableness or rationality work; rather, it is meant to show how they do work.

Continues in source: This is not cognitive science | Meaningness

and:

von Glaserfeld – An Introduction to Radical Constructivism

In: Watzlawick, P. (ed.) (1984) The invented reality. New York: Norton,
pp. 17–40.

English translation of: Glasersfeld, E. (1981) Einführung in
den Radikalen Konstruktivismus. In: Watzlawick, P. (ed.) Die Erfundene
Wirklichkeit, Munich: Piper, pp. 16–38.

http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/070.1 (pdf)

also: http://vonglasersfeld.com/

What is Radical Constructivism
and Who Are Its Proponents?
The notion “radical constructivism” (RC) was coined by Ernst von Glasersfeld in 1974 in order to emphasize that from an epistemological perspective any constructivism has to be complete (or “radical”) in order not to relapse into some kind of fancy realism. The basic tenet of RC is that any kind of knowledge is constructed rather than perceived through senses. As such, RC does not present a metaphysics in the strict sense as it does not make statements about an outside reality (“No statement” means neither confirming nor denying reality. The subject of much criticism, RC equals solipsism, doesn’t therefore apply). Now, the idea itself does not originate in EvG. Forerunners of the RC movement in the 18th century were Giambatista Vico, whose dictum “verum ipsum factum” already pointed in the direction of knowledge construction, and George Berkeley whose claim “esse est percipi” challenged metaphysics.

On a slightly different path, the cybernetic one, Heinz von Foerster approached the topic of what was called second order cybernetics. It focuses on self-referential systems and the importance of eigenbehaviors for the explanation of complex phenomena. Eventually, this idea would emerge the concept of “operational closure”: any cognitive system is semantically independent (and impenetrable). From the late 50s to the mid 70s, HvF had been running the Biological Computer Laboratory (BCL) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign which was a dwell of people thinking in similar lines. Among others, prominent members of the BCL were

Humberto Maturana who, as the founder of the theory of autopoiesis, focuses on the central role of the observer;
Francisco Varela who developed the ideas of circularity and ‘enacted’ cognition further;
W. Ross Ashby who was a main figure in the cybernetics movement;
Gordon Pask who developed a conversation theory.
In Germany, an avalanche was triggered in the late 80s by translations of major works by the above authors, plus original contributions in German, such as Siegfried J. Schmidt, Hans-Rudi Fischer, Gerhard Roth, Gebhard Rusch, and others. Also of German origin, but independent from the others, was Jakob von Uexküll, whose work in the 1920s and 1930s focused on the internal cognitive world of organisms.

Glossary
Autopoiesis: A process whereby a system constitutes and maintains its own organization

Cybernetics: The science of communication and control in animal and machine

Eigenbehavior: The behavior through which a system asserts its autonomy from other systems

Epistemology: The theory of knowledge

Metaphysics: The theory of reality

Realism: The idea that reality exists independently from the observer

Second order Cybernetics: The cybernetics of observing systems

Solipsism: The claim that reality does not exist

Created: June 2000. Last update: 26 Mar 2004
© Copyright by Alex Riegler 2000. All rights reserved. Part of the Radical Constructivist Homepage.
This material may be freely linked to by any other electronic text. Commercial use and any other copying are prohibited without the express written permission of the copyright holder.

via What is Radical Constructivism and Who Are Its Proponents?

Wow. There is a lot of stuff here.

And links to both the original Radical Constructivism site (last updated 2017) – https://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/

And the ongoing journal Constructivist Foundations https://constructivist.info/

Constructivist E-Print Archive
Publications: 5950 • Authors: 3092
Search CEPA
» Help with Search
The Constructivist E-Print Archive (CEPA.INFO) is a research tool providing a single-point access to the scholarly literature on constructivist approaches such as radical constructivism, second-order cybernetics, the theory of autopoiesis, enactivism, neurophenomenology, non-dualizing philosophy, and many others including critical publications. These publications cover a total of 53 disciplines.
Features:

Read and print the full text versions of most papers on your computer, tablet or smartphone
with the option of excerpting and collecting quotes with a single tap
Many full text versions are also available
as downloads in in PDF or Word
Find bibliographical details of constructivist publications (including abstracts)
ready to be exported in one of nine formats including EndNote, BibTex, and RIS
Add/upload your own constructivist publications
with the option of converting them to the portable device friendly CEF format
Collect, manage and edit quotes (“snippets”) from full texts
and exported them as Word documents
Make annotations to publications
either publically or for a research group or for a classroom assignment
Create reading lists
for yourself or for a classroom assignment
Receive weekly notifications
of newly added full texts based on your interests
For some of these services, you need to login in with your Constructivist Foundations account or create such an account for free.
For more detailed information and instructions check out FAQ in the menu above.
Please provide us with your
feedback/evaluation/suggestions

via ᏟᎬᏢᎪ Constructivist E-Paper Archive

Call for papers to the Luhmann Conference 2020 on “Moral communication. Observed with social systems theory”

Place: Inter-University Centre (IUC), Dubrovnik, Croatia
Address: Don Frana Bulicá 4, 20000 Dubrovnik, Croatia
Dates: 15-18 September 2020

The PDF version of this CFP is available for download here.

Theme: The conference committee invites contributions on the significance of moral communication in Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory. As readers familiar with his work will recognise, Luhmann’s approach to morality is characterised by a profound moral scepticism and a certain neglect of moral communication not only as an occasional topic, but also as a distinct form of communication. As contemporary society is continuously producing moral communication, however, social systems theory is bound to adequately deal with this phenomenon if its claim to a universal theory is to be maintained. We therefore welcome contributions from scholars with an interest in moral communication at all levels of society.

more in source: CFP | Moral communication. Observed with social systems theory | Dr. Steffen Roth

9th World Complexity Science Academy Worldwide conference, Ischia, Italy, 23-25 March 2020

GEGNET: A Complex System Vision on Global Governance and Policy Modelling

Gegnet is a German theoretical concept meaning limitless opening to the possible.

The current global economic context of worldwide business and direct foreign investment is comprised of a decreasing number of huge players named Global Players (GP), such as the European Union (EU), the United States (US), the MERCOSUR, the United African Market, along with Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS). It radically redesigns the public policies and their scale about digitalization, intangible asset portfolio creation (e.g. patents, trademarks, licenses, copyrights), taxation, public expenditures, international trade regulations and much more.

This network of treaties wrapping up our planet is shaping a spiral convergent trend, pushing forward the shift from international to supranational lawmaking through the setting up of a transnational agenda for global governance and policy modelling.

The key evolutionary challenge and paramount goal of the 9th WCSA Worldwide Conference is to be the host for innovative lawmaking / policy modelling, legislative implementation, institutional redesign, and economic development also by citizenship expansion. We will be working on shaping a triple helix of (1) legislative design, (2) free-trade alignment, and (3) digital standardization.

via Events – WCSA

Source: Review of Daniel Belgrad, ‘The Culture of Feedback: Ecological Thinking in ’70s America’

Mind in Matter
Scott McLemee reviews Daniel Belgrad’s The Culture of Feedback: Ecological Thinking in ’70s America.

By Scott McLemee
January 17, 2020
18 COMMENTS

Somewhere on its way to entering the vernacular, the word cybernetics took on connotations of high technology, with tremendous computational power almost as a given. But the quintessential cybernetic system is humble, indeed, and very much simpler than any computer. It is the thermostat.

Just to be clear, the “cybernetic system” in this case consists of not just the device on the wall with its dials or buttons, but also a temperature sensor as well as whatever apparatus heats or cools the room. When the sensor registers that the room’s temperature has fallen below, say, 70 degrees (to use a season-appropriate example of a likely setting), the thermostat translates that information into a command to turn the heat on, then off again, once the sensor reports that the target temperature has been reached. Framing this a little more abstractly, we have here a system engaged in posing a question to its environment, generating a binary (yes/no) answer and then, as necessary, taking action to cause change in a certain determinate direction.

Not much computational power is required. Then again, “cybernetics” derives from an ancient Greek word referring to the pilot of a ship. Navigation, not calculation, is at its root.

To the best of my recollection, I first came across the thermostat as quintessential example of a closed feedback system in a wildly interdisciplinary volume by Anthony Wilden called System and Structure: Essays in Communication and Exchange (1980). Wilden in turn adopted it from Gregory Bateson’s Steps to an Ecology of Mind (1972), an even more category-defying volume. Besides the anthropological fieldwork he had carried out (some of it carried on with Margaret Mead, his wife for a time) Bateson pulled together his research into schizophrenia, evolutionary theory and biological symmetry — besides which he had participated in the Macy Conferences on Cybernetics held between 1946 and 1953. Among the papers in Steps to an Ecology of Mind is Bateson’s analysis of Alcoholics Anonymous as a cybernetic system — one more adaptive and functional than the alcoholic’s personality, which otherwise remains trapped in a short-circuiting feedback loop of trying to establish its own power over the bottle.

Through Batesonian lenses, the world looked like one huge array of self-regulating systems. Some were at cross purposes (imagine two thermostats in the same room, at different settings) and some just did not work very well.

“An entirely new epistemology must come out of cybernetics and systems theory,” wrote Bateson in the alcoholism study. It would require “a new understanding of mind, self, human relationship and power.” Daniel Belgrad’s The Culture of Feedback: Ecological Thinking in ’70s America (University of Chicago Press) finds much the same set of priorities reflected in the work of artists, musicians, activists, film directors and the makers of public service announcements that ran on TV.

Continues in source: Review of Daniel Belgrad, ‘The Culture of Feedback: Ecological Thinking in ’70s America’

Click to access Living-Systems-Theory-and-the-Practice-of-Stewarding-Change-June-2015-min.pdf

So much good systems thinking in this discussion of physical literacy!

source Part 2: Considering the Individual -Environment Fit at the Core of Physical Literacy.  | footblogball

Part 2: Considering the Individual -Environment Fit at the Core of Physical Literacy.
January 20, 2020 footblogball-Mark O Sullivan Uncategorized
In part 2 of this blog, I will introduce a conceptual realignment of physical literacy that is different from the ‘business-as-usual’ concepts (see part 1), that seemingly underpin the construct in both policy and practice and even as a finally packaged product.

“Skillful interactions” refers to how a mover coordinates his/her behaviour within the performance context in relation to that environment, on the basis of not only the immediate physical and informational (i.e., situational) demands, but also on the basis of historical and cultural factors. Thus, following from Newell (1986), skillful interactions are sufficiently optimal solutions to the movement problem faced in terms of safety, efficiency and/or effectiveness for that individual at that moment in time – Phil Kierney (Footblogball,May 2018).

Such an emphasis shifts the narrative away from fundamental to functional, towards developing an adaptive ‘interactor’; considering the individual-environment fit.

Introduction

Current literature contains different representations of the concept of physical literacy (Edwards et al., 2016). Due to lacking a clear theoretical foundation, it can be argued that the construct has progressively evolved into something it originally was not (Young, O’Connor and Alfrey, 2019).This adaption of numerous definitions and interpretations across different countries, disciplines and organisation (Shearer et al., 2018), has arguably led to a lack of consensus as to how to employ it in practice (Hyndman & Pill, 2018; Jurbala, 2015).

This vagueness associated with the construct reveals aneed for a comprehensive theoretical rationale to underpin how to apply the concepts and ideas from physical literacy research. One such framework that can support the physical literacy journey is the theoretical framework of ecological dynamics. It has been previously argued by Roberts, Newcombe and Davids (2018) that ecological dynamics can inform how we can evolve the concept of physical literacy, both in policy and physical education curriculum, away from the dominant traditional approaches. I argue, from this perspective, the concept of physical literacy can be enriched and extended within and beyond organised sports and physical education, through the reconceptualisation of the nature of an individual’s relationship with the specific environments they interact with over a lifespan. The establishment of an individual -environment fit across varied movement contexts over a lifespan, should therefore be a central tenet of the concept of physical literacy.

continues in source: Part 2: Considering the Individual -Environment Fit at the Core of Physical Literacy.  | footblogball

I’m not comfortable with the description ‘the Liberating Structure ‘Panarchy” – since if I understand correctly, ‘Liberating Structures’ is a collection of facilitation techniques which significantly post-dates a large volume of work around the concept of panarchy (covered here at https://stream.syscoi.com/2019/05/16/panarchy/ , https://stream.syscoi.com/2019/12/31/ecology-and-society-the-dynamics-of-purposeful-change-a-model-silverman-and-hill-2018/ , https://stream.syscoi.com/2018/08/27/silverman-h-and-g-m-hill-2018-the-dynamics-of-purposeful-change-a-model-h-silverman-and-gm-hill/ , and mentioned in https://stream.syscoi.com/2017/08/21/cyclical-history-and-generations/) – there is some referencing in the article – however it is an interesting article about operationalising a concept, so here for consideration.

via Change Organizational Systems with the Liberating Structure ‘Panarchy’ – Business 2 Community

Change Organizational Systems with the Liberating Structure ‘Panarchy’
Christiaan Verwijs— January 21, 2020

How do you change a complex system? This is the quintessential question facing the people eager to change systems — like politicians, Scrum Masters, thought leaders, and other change agents.

In this post, we explore how the Liberating Structure ‘Panarchy’ offers a powerful perspective and allows you to put systems thinking into practice. And even though it is perhaps the most complicated of them all, Panarchy brings together all the promises of Liberating Structures: engage everyone and unleash change on every level.

“Even though it is perhaps the most complicated of them all, Panarchy brings together all the promises of Liberating Structures: engage everyone and unleash change on every level.”

Continues in Change Organizational Systems with the Liberating Structure ‘Panarchy’ – Business 2 Community

Project and Program Evaluation
Ripple Effects Mapping
Overview
Ripple Effects Mapping (REM) is a versatile participatory evaluation tool. The intent of REM is to collect the untold stories and behind-the-scene activities that can ripple out from a specific program or activity.

Designed to work effectively for gathering evaluation data from program participants, community or coalition partners, or other groups.
Effectively identifies what has occurred, as well as what is not occurring
Provides an opportunity to decide what direction the community, coalition, or group should head next.
Overall, the REM process is an effective way to get information from participants and on to paper in a visual way.

Additional Resources:

A Field Guide to Ripple Effects Mapping

Using graphics, pictures, and real-life examples of how Ripple Effects Mapping has been successfully used in multiple settings, the Field Guide to Ripple Effects Mapping provides a comprehensive overview of REM. Providing an in-depth examination of the origins, elements, and how-to of the REM process, this book is a step-by-step guide to successfully implementing this process with a group, collaboration, or community of choice.

To access the Field Guide, click here (Note: Move down the web page to locate the Field Guide).

Using Ripple Effects Mapping to Determine Your Program Outcomes

Two of the original developers of Ripple Effects Mapping conducted a webinar for eXtension. Join Debra Hansen, Associate Professor at Washington State University Extension and Lorie Higgins, Extension Specialist, University of Idaho, as they demonstrate the Ripple Effects Mapping process. This webinar describes how the mapping process has been used in a number of states and settings. Additionally variations in how it has been implemented is discussed. Finally, instructions are provided for coding to the Community Capitals Framework, as well as digitizing the maps.

To access the webinar, click here.

In-Depth Ripple Effects Mapping: A Participatory Evaluation Tool

During the 2016 National Association of Extension Program and Staff Development Professionals Conference, a workshop was presented focused on the REM process.

During the workshop, participants learned the following:

The foundation of Ripple Effects Mapping, including its field development and testing, therefore understanding how and why it is an effective evaluation tool;
How to develop useful and relevant Appreciative Inquiry questions and how to conduct Appreciative Inquiry interviews;
How to organize and conduct a Ripple Effects Mapping session by actively partaking in a mapping with fellow participants;
And what to do with the qualitative data collected during the mapping session, including how to digitize, code, and analyze the information and report the findings.
To review the materials presented, click here.

Published References:

Ripple Effects Mapping: A “Radiant” Way to Capture Program Impacts

Ripple Effects Mapping: An Effective Tool for Identifying Community Development Program Impacts

Using Ripple Effects Mapping to Evaluate Program Impact: Choosing or Combining the Methods That Work Best for You

via Ripple Effects Mapping | Project and Program Evaluation | Washington State University