RE: [-empyre-] re more fundamental -fwd from Andrew Murpie .

[<fshifreen@mindspring.com>]

I have following some of the debate. How about David Bohm and the implicate
order?
In his view the universe is a hologram , where each part or fragment has a
complete mapping, or germ of the whole. Therefore to follow the logic. the
mind is not embodied but a only a  part of the universal order. Reality and
space are "infolded" . and are then explicated inot reality. The interesting
thing is that science, including string theory, has come around to many of
these ideas as propounded by Bohm.   In my reading of Bohm, the whole is
greater than the sum of its parts, and each greater level of order reveals a
greater view and dominion of the real. Just as each one of our cells is a
living creature , complete in itself that once joined with its like into a
system and now exists within a larger system, an organ perhaps, the cell
might not know its role in the larger picture.
Bohm creates a living universe that somehow coincides with both Shamanism
and science.  Karl Pribam wrote about the holographic mind, and how many
functions can be taken up by different parts of the brain.
I once worked with Varela at the NYU Brain lab. He had the idea that the
differing contradictions of mind-body, whole-part, are reflective of a
complementarity , not opposition. They are like two sides of the same coin.
One "it" and the other the process of becoming "it" .  Interesting thinkers
all who should be part of the dialogue      Frank Shifreen , Teachers
College
www.thedigitalmuseum.org
www.drinkink.org
http://retiform.ath.cx/index.php

-----Original Message-----
From: empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
[mailto:empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au]On Behalf Of -empyre-owner
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 10:59 PM
To: soft_skinned_space
Subject: [-empyre-] re more fundamental -fwd from Andrew Murpie .


or to perhaps take this in a more positive direction - what if cognition
occurs within the networks, between skins (machine, human or otherwise),
i.e. not 'within the brain' or 'within the computer' - and what if the
explanation of cognition occurs somewhere between machines and humans, and
between all these schools etc ... "writing" might become one set of streams
linked to others - a carrier not a picture ...

this is of course an old question for many artists working with
technology....

regards, andrew
--
"I thought I had reached port; but I seemed to be cast
back again into the open sea" (Deleuze and Guattari, after Leibniz)

Dr Andrew Murphie - Senior Lecturer
School of Media and Communications, University of New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia, 2052
web:http://mdcm.arts.unsw.edu.au/homepage/StaffPages/Murphie/
fax:612 93856812 tlf:612 93855548 email: a.murphie@unsw.edu.au
room 311H, Webster Building


_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre