Hylozoism vs. Long Term Potentiation (Part 2 of two mailed parts):

Administrador del Nodo Postmaster at neubio.sld.ar
Sat Nov 4 16:33:30 EST 1995


>From Postmaster Sat, 4 Nov 95 17:48:02 ARG remote from neubio
>Received: by neubio.sld.ar (UUPC/PcCorreo 3.0) with UUCP; Sat, 4 Nov 95 17:48:02 ARG
>Date: Sat, 4 Nov 95  17:48:02 ARG
>From: Administrador del Nodo <Postmaster at neubio.sld.ar>
>Message-ID: <634jz442 at neubio.sld.ar>
>X-Mailer: UUPC/PcCorreo 3.0
>To: neuroscience at net.bio.net
>Subject: Hylozoism vs. Long Term Potentiation (Part 2 of two mailed parts): 
>
>
>
>
>(Continuation of the first part)
> 
>But hylozoism implied relinquishing the exogenist description.  
>This was somewhat stimulated by the aforementioned atmos-
>phere and perhaps mostly by dint of our very remoteness 
>-neither behaviourism nor neuronism thundered here, nor 
>emergentistic complexity theories, nor outlooks glad to forgo 
>natural facts by self-limiting to analyze formulations-.    But it 
>was needed to distinguish hylozoism from a futile insertion of 
>dynamic or hormic agencies inside spatial structures; and, to 
>do this, our tradition undertook two parallel ways.  While on 
>one hand the holographic-holophonic models of cortical func-
>tioning  were developed here upon some important phyloge-
>netic hints abroad unavailable (namely, the ciliary descent of 
>such holographic-holophonic-like definition of stationarities, 
>discovered by Prof. Mario Crocco after Prof. Jakob's death oc-
>curred in 1956), on the other hand it was also needed to per-
>form painstaking studies in the history of ideas, also performed 
>by Prof. Mario Crocco and disciples, to elucidate the prefigura-
>tions of the syncretic cultural myth that supported the ex-
>ogenism. At the same time, Prof. Karl Pribram and disciples in 
>the U.S. also forwarded holographic (and T.W. Barrett holo-
>phonic) models,but they stayed without those important phylo-
>genetic links and also foreign to the problems of said syncretic 
>myth.  So since 1974 Prof. Pribram fell in such futile insertion 
>of hormic agencies in structural neurobiology, and his school 
>stayed cloven to exogenism, while here by that time we fully 
>adhered since long to a program studying, for the neurobiologi-
>cal sake, (1) the features of such physical interaction upon 
>which the system of stationarities relax, (2) the historical pre-
>figurations conspiring against such a study, and (3) the experi-
>mental use of such a physical resource. This unusual and diffi-
>cult perspective widened the communicational gap between us 
>and the neurobiological traditions abroad.
>
>3. (Basic neurobiological processes became of industrial inter-
>est). In the meanwhile, the exogenist explanations of neurobi-
>ological function, developed upon the ganglionary models 
>amenable to fruitful networking, became for the first time of 
>industrial interest.  However true academic communication on 
>our developments was at the time impracticable, some indus-
>tries began to think in their need of non-Turing automata,and in 
>1979 T.D. Lee published (in Chinese) the first edition of his 
>"Particle Physics and Field Theory" (English Tr.: Harwood 
>Acad. Publ., 1981) in whose paragraph 2 of Chapter 25 (page 
>826 of the translation) mentioned the possibility of vacuum en-
>gineering, just as our school envisaged upon low-energy (but 
>coherent) physiological processes (instead of the high-energy, 
>small-volume induction of phase transitions therein men-
>tioned). To avoid sectorial or secret developments and putting 
>the new natural resource in full public domain, Prof. Crocco 
>recorded in 1976 an Argentine patent file (affecting most coun-
>tries as signataries of the Paris Convention) and later filed sev-
>eral patents abroad. On October 2nd, 1980, his institute was 
>assaulted and he saved his life by short, but the premises were 
>taken; books, notes and instruments were robbed or scattered, 
>and he was clearly summonned to abandon this research and 
>tramitation of the patents.  One of these, however, was already 
>granted four days earlier (UK 1,582,301), putting irrevocably in 
>the public domain said resource. In the next intervening years 
>Prof. Mario Crocco and this tradition supported the most in-
>credible tribulations. A few years ago we understood that the 
>situation had somehow changed and decided to confront our 
>views and results with those at the foreign.  However,due to the 
>cessation date for the classification affecting some papers, a 
>monographic synthesis will not be available until next February; 
>a short divulgatory paper in French is available now and I can 
>send it to anyone interested.
>                                Cheers,
>                                               Mariela
>
>

       =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
       Prof. Mariela Szirko,
       <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 
                            
       Centro de Investig. Neurobiologicas, Ministry
       of Health & Welfare, Argentine Republic; and Lab. of
       Electroneurobiological Res., Hospital "Dr. Jose Tiburcio Borda", 
       Municipality of Buenos Aires,
       Office:  Phone/Fax (54 1) 306 -7314
                e-mail <postmaster at neubio.gov.ar>
       Standard disclaimer: Las opiniones de este mensaje son personales 
      y no comprometen las dependencias a cargo de la firmante.
  Reply to THIS message,  ONLY to: <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 
  =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list