[ What is Science: 1. Origin: Collectively Enacting a First-order Perspective ]

Here's an initial objectivist first-order* description of the nature & constitution of modern scientific inquiry from an enactive point of view:

* 3P-only description without the observer-actor

1/3 It could be complemented, to have a better grasping about the form/process complex dialectics, with the famous Varela"s paper "Not one, not two": the "it" (form) and the process leading to "it".

A new discussion on the subject (not seen yet):


2/3

[ Logic²: from Morin's Complex Thinking to Ancient Catuṣkoṭi Logic ] 🧵🪡

I'm happy because yesterday I have finally academically sourced (G. Priest) my second order logic, or exploration heuristic and hermeneutic logic, the other complementary, implicit and hidden face of classical normative and propositional logic (Aristotle, Russell, Frege, etc).

[ "Metaphysics": Formal Worldview vs Processual Method ] 🧵

I don't like the old term "metaphysics" because of its lack of analytical discrimination: do we speak politely about the subjective preconceptions of a view (so critically about its hidden & implicit political agenda), or about its transcendental (Kant) a priori conditions of possibility?

Moreover, even if physics has historical precedence as a prototype of the objective study of the world-out-there, i.e. of a materialist so-called "realist" formal view,

[ Scybernethics & Neurophenomenology ] 🧵🪡

Both shares the same influences (enaction) and objectives: to exceed the mind-mind problem (extension of the traditional mind-body problem, Jackendoff), i.e. relating computational & phenomenological aspects of the mind.

https://twitter.com/ki_cog/status/1807692107420746210

While neurophenomenology is polarized on the traditional first order of science, coupling the rational dimension with experimental empiricism, scybernethics is more philosophically polarized and aimed at the active transformation of the observer-actor himself.

[ Hacking the Machine (in Ourself) ] 🧵💉

People should stop blaming or adulating robotic machines and understand that they are just an objectified mirror of *our own automatism and conventions*. It is important to see that this reflection can be used in a cognitive reverse engineering perspective (cognitive hacking) to better understand our own habitual and therefore uncontested *unconscious* habits of the body (concrete mechanics) and mind (abstract computations).

[ Defining Scybernethics ]

It is really hard for me to define "what" is scybernethics, as its nature is processual (how, why). For me, in the tradition of "Enaction" (Varela & al.), forms are always thought as a posteriori of processes. Initially it was just a endeavor to model and theorize legitimately my own mind to better understand it because beyond the world in which I live, it was the other mystery I wanted to explore in my lifetime.

[ The Form / Process Dipole & Enaction: Toward a New Rational Spiritual Path ] 🧵🪡

"I believe that the fundamental commitment of Euro Western civilization and thinking is to explain away movement by something that doesn’t move" - Thomas Nail.

👉 For me, as an enactive and embodied thinker, all static formalizations (including this one) are to be understood more deeply as "enacted" by a socio-historical (history AND theories of epistemology) and organic (sensorimotor schemes) meta-stabilization process.

[ Distinction²: Scientific Normative Explanation is NOT Heuristic Understanding ]

The explanation/understanding conceptual dipole, as all c-dipoles, is *asymetrical* for the scientific observer-actor (phenomenological hysteresis process).

1/3

https://twitter.com/ki_cog/status/1870023573630529793

The normativity of a description is toward the general and uninformed public, so called "lay man", while the heuristic is toward informed peers only for stimulating meaning-making and creativity and which are aware of the complex context and subtle meaning conveyed.

2/3

[ Scientific Explanation & Machines: the Technicality of Language ] 🧵

A strict "scientific explanation", as (first order/classical) logically canonical reason could be understand as a *normative linguistic machine*, trying to drive the reader/auditor from a common point of view to a shift in his understanding, and so perception. It is a linear linguistic expression grounded on past causes or teleological future to be intelligible in common.

[ Scybernethics as a Sub-Linguistic Journey ]

In my "brain" (conceptual map), I have an enacted category named "Conceptualization as negation of a whole". This "whole" is the linguistic phenomenological/cognitive domain.

This seems in phase with the Buddhist "Apoha theory".

https://twitter.com/ki_cog/status/1868271569338040530

"A top-down approach uses the tools of logic, such as negation operators, to work from linguistic meaning and the generality of concepts down to real particulars, which lack any generality or shared natures, while avoiding any commitment to real universals."
- Evan Thompson.

[ Scybernethics & Tekhne: Simondon, Relational Realism and the Limit of Formalism/Ontology ] 🧵🪡

After being driven by the enactive framework, I have converged (through Stiegler) toward Simondon. But his technical, and so transjective conception confusing the 1PP and the 3PP,

https://twitter.com/TNWJackson/status/1868458184387838117

seems to lead to a relational realism ground I have de-constructed in my enactive 1P-{1P-3P} "toward a meshwork of groundless grounds" polarized (self)understanding.

His conception is clearly useful to better understand the/our technicity (a current blind spot of Science),

[ Scybernethics: Conceptualization ] 🧵🪡

In my scybernethics enacted approach (enacted representation AND methodology), PDP/ANN models where the inspiration (Cf. 3 👇) of how to think in a parallel and distributed way the emergent bottom-up inductive, but also creative, embodied dynamics of conceptualization (generality).

It was crossed, through suspension of judgement leading to their semantical embodiement (and not only abstract intellection), with the top-down and normative scientific cultural representation and its key differentials,

[ The "New" Sophistry ]

A short critique of the more and more generalized confusing and blurring technoscientific mentality, as an excessive empirical polarization of the scientific episteme, leading to a dangerous rhetorical, normative & operational/instrumental *sophistry*.

https://twitter.com/ki_cog/status/1867645600549720300

Aristotle, wake up, they have gone mad (again), but this time because you succeed too much with your normative "excluded third", confusing institutional collective deontology and private ethics. And Descartes was a *philosopher*, not a scientist:

[ Let's Be Clear / Kick the Tires... ] 🧵💉

"Bacteria, body cells, slime molds, plants, and even molecular networks can learn and solve problems"

While I appreciate the clarifying intent and the direction toward understanding biocognition...

https://twitter.com/drmichaellevin/status/1867573429177594033

First of all, "intelligence" is a confusing transjective technical polarized term (as opposed to the clear scientific analytical episteme, cf. AI). "Cognition" seems to me more traditional and scientifically neutral.

[ The Rational Scientific Priority of Theory over Facts ]

As everything observed is observed by an observer, any "fact" is implicitly & already a theory. Theories and paradigms are attentional grids which shape *the domain* of the observable,

1/2 and so of the experimentable, of the observed and tested "facts". This doesn't deny the empirical induction, but re-situate and relativize it locally, as facts acquires their meaning in the context of a theory.

2/3

[ Scybernethics & Autonomy²: History of Self Transformation ]

The history of life can be seen as the history of self-constitution, as the enaction of a "self". In this regard, human beings are the state of the living art, being able to define what it mean to "be human" and

1/3 to be conscious of it.

There is no "Science of Consciousness" without an historical and developmental (time dimenTionality) science of the self.

2/3

[ The Two Epistemological Technoscientific Ambiguities Leading to the Actual Confusion ]

This political ambiguity should be put in regard with two others, but epistemological this time:

1/4

https://twitter.com/ki_cog/status/1865350437026636210

1. The transjective ambiguity of Technics leading to the generalized technological confusion between object and subject, between models and conventional reality; Technics being processual and implicit/experiential, and so a blind spot of formal and normative classical science.2/4

[ Technoscience & Self-Shifting: from Abstractive Civilizational Drift to Embodied Enactive Rationality² ] 🧵🪡

A key insight of my journey in Scyberethics is that technologies, if used passively & without deeply and actively understanding them, don't extend us, *they shift us* by disembodying and deterritorializing us (heimatlosigkeit), to an extreme point which is no more compatible with the vitally needed homeostatic regulation of life which has a bandwidth logic (meta-stability).

[ The Two Forms of Transcendence (in one) ]

For me the human condition needs two forms of transcendence (or "transcendence in immanence"): the first one can be called the conventional or public one, in phase with our common sense (natural attitude) corresponding to our objective immersion in what is not our present ego: objects, others, society and history. The second one, the spiritual, is a more private path and correspond to a more complex endeavor harmonizing the first one, recognizing its collective validity, with self-knowledge,

[ Cybernetics, Enaction & the End of Functionalism ] 🧵🪸

To understand enactive modeling (as any scientific and rational representation is an evolutionary model experimentally correlated), one need to understand its socio-historical roots in the cybernetics functionalist style , and how this functionalist cognitivist style has been "metabolized and digested" comprehensively into the embodied enactive style of thinking:

👉 [ What WAS Cybernetics ]

bsky.app/profile/scyber…

[ Understanding the Connectionist ("genAI") Epistemological Disruption ] 🧵 🪡

I will quickly articulate some key rationals in this thread to explain the disruptive role of "generative AI" & their unexpected success, which is also at the foundation of my "scybernethics". In a nutshell:

connectionist modeling is a de-construction of one pillar of traditional natural & cognitive science: functionalism.