Recently I have
written a paper (forthcoming) entitled “Realidad, Cerebro y
Cultura. Sistémica elemental e incorporación del
orden semiótico cultural” [“Reality, Brain and Culture.
Systemics and the Embodiment of
Semiotic Cultural Order”]; in this paper is defended the
hypothesis, founded on Nelson Goodman Theory of
World-Versions Making, that our reality
(experiential reality as you may say, or “the reality in
which we have conscious of ourselves as living in” as Putnam
said) is –from a naturalistic-neurobiological departure
point- the effect of dynamic systems to stabilizing
neurobiological epigenetic rules. These rules,
I think, are the phenotype proper of a singular
culture; or, in other words, the correlate of semiotic
singularity of a culture in a set of biological systems.
These epigenetic rules are ontological patterns
(but not ontic patterns… those there’s no exists) that
constitute the semiotic stock of a singular culture. In this
order of ideas, on one hand, we have systemic
organization (depending on genetic expression –e.g.
normal corticogenetic processes-) and systemic
structure (depending on epigenetic stabilization
subsequent having make up automatic transformation on
systemic organization) of our neurocognitive system and, on
the other hand, we have systemic organization and systemic
structure of our cultural semiotic order. The
embodiment of that cultural systemic organization, in
consequence of systemic flows and filters with others,
generate an epigenetic background. That
organizational background with the ontogenic process
generates, following to Maturana, the type identity of that
system; briefly, we are human only before having embodied a
cultural background and having stabilized an ontogenic
organization (which depends on genetic expression (genome
and surrounding pressures to its expression)). That
epigenetic background works as a platform for perception and
action and its constructions depends on the existence of
pre-dispositional abilities to make permanent neural
connective patterns (in this sense the learning seems an
abductive performance). According with these ideas, the
range of epigenetic variability depends on the limits of our
embodied cultural semiotic order and its ontological
patterns. This neurocognitive-systemic analysis might
generate a new understanding of the intrinsic relationships
present in the structure of our reality, our culture and our
neurobiological dynamics.
This work seems to me involve
serious implications to etno- psyquiatrics (cultural
relativism (?)) and, specifically, a possible ontological
sense of serendipity and its relation with Proktor’s
agnotology. Two relevant problems continue
open (between universes of others): (a) How the system in
which the subject is (any culture), actually, is embodied in
it? This problem might take us to an autopoiético analysis
of culture (perhaps, in Luhman way (?)); (b) (related with
the later) What relationships are there with Memetics
theoretical framework (specially Blackmore’s)?
Herewith kindly I shall wait for your current opinion on
this project; of course, your critics, observations,
recommendations, bibliography suggestions are always
welcome.
With Best Regards,
CARLOS M. MUÑOZ S.
Universidad del Valle
Grupo de Investigación Mentis
Santiago de Cali, Feb. 29/ 2008
ANSWER:
