Civilization and living body. A fundamental consideration to the evolution theory.
		by Hiromasa Noguti.
	This was written in Japanese language in 2001 year and was translated to English. (http://www2.justnet.ne.jp/~cotosiro/with11.htm). However, since it was the unsatisfactory performance, it was rewritten again in October 10, 2003 and in April 4, 2004 and in February 12, 2005.
		Evolution and information and thought.
	At this knot, it thinks about the fundamental relation between information and evolution. Therefore, if it states it in turns, it first have to explain the conception of evolution and of information originally. However, as for evolution, since it already stated it in the 4th knot and so on, please read those explanations. 11-1:Information and thought. What kind of thing would a information be ? If following the general understanding, it seems it is the meaning the physical existence called the so-called medium shows. And, as you know, it is said the medium is classed to the kind proper for memorization(accumulation of data), to the kind proper for a information transmission. So, generally the medium proper for memorization is a brain, a gene, and a hard disk, and so on. And, it is said the medium proper for a information transmission is a light, a sound, and so on. However, it doesn't seem it is sufficient for future consideration it understands the information with only the conception like that. Thereupon, for some time, it thinks to examine the circumstances making a information exist and the function of information. The data, and so on is transmitted as the information to the taker from the sender through the medium. And, if the sender and the taker is the same, the information transmission in this case is replaced to the concept called a thinking generally. In passing, in this case, it is natural that the conception of a thinking include also the revision and renewal of a memory because the thinking is the process of the logical calculation of the various meaning memorized by the said cognition-subject. In other words, it can say the continuous revision and renewal and so on of memory occurs with the process of a thinking necessarily. But, it also can think the sender and taker in this case each are the different neural cells from each. If so, it can't say that the sender is same as the taker in this case because it has to regard the thinking as the process in which the neural cells exchange a information through neural system. In that meaning, it can say the thinking isn't different from the so-called information transmission. However, the relationship between the subject in the thinking and the sender and taker like that is stated later a little. It is because it seems the sender and taker each behave also like the cognition-subject in that case. However, after this, the taker and sender each are expressed as the receiver and the transmitter for the moment to distinguish them from the thinking subject. In passing, the word of "cognition-subject" in this case includes the meaning of the thinking subject. By the way, it doesn't seem that the information transmission called the thinking is confined to the works of the neural system. In other words, it can think that all internal reaction of the organism shoulders a part of the thinking if the said brain can perceive the internal reaction like that to be the information finally. And, it is natural that the reactions like that are based on the characteristic logical formula established between the said organs of the organism. If so, it is possible that the logical formulas like that link logically to the thinking, corresponding to the request of the said brain. In other words, it seems it is impossible that the right thinking is established by only the said brain. Therefore, it thinks it has to be established by at least the whole of the said organism. If it says it a little more concretely, the thinking would have to be established at least by hearing the genes' voices, the organs' voices and the somatic cells' voices or other. Therefore, it seems that many of our errors occur with ignoring the voices like that in the preconceptions. However, would it be proper it confines the above mentioned logical link to the said organism's internal reaction really ? In other words, it may have to expand the conception of the thinking into the relationship of the said cognition-subject and the outside world. However, since it seems the thing causes the hard problem for the conception of thinking, it thinks about the characteristic of the cognition-subject, and so on for a while because the cognition-subject is the thinking subject persistently in this case. So, if the thinking is the internal reaction of the organism, is the logical link of the reaction like that, it seems the information transmission called the thinking needs the cognition-subject controling the transmitter and receiver. If not, it is only mere information transmission. But, if it understands the transmitter or the receiver strictly with the physical viewpoint, it doesn't seem it can keep the self-identity because of the passage of the time. It seems this understanding is proper because it is that their internal condition and position in the space-time always change. In other words, the existence keeping the complete self-identity doesn't exist at the process of thinking, if it sees it from the physical viewpoint. If so, wouldn't the cognition-subject exist of the thinking ? Would it have to think the thinking is only the exchanging a information logically ? If it sees it from the viewpoint of natural science, by any chance, it may be so. In other words, the thinking may be the logical calculation the mere program does, with exchanging a information. However, if it sees it from the viewpoint of ego, the thinking subject exists in spite of the passage of time. In other words, it is that I am me persistently. And, if so, it is possible it thinks that the thinking subject is the information keeping the self-identity under any circumstances at least in this world. If so, and if the consideration about ego in the former knot is proper, it can apply the understanding like that about the thinking subject also for the cognition-subject different from me as well. The transmitter sends the information, expecting the receiver's reaction, and the receiver perceives the stimulus sent from transmitter, with understanding it as the information. If so, in that case, since the transmitter also acts as the receiver as the receiver acts as the transmitter, it seems it should think that they behave as the cognition-subject. If so, it doesn't seem it needs to consider the difference of sender and transmitter, the difference of taker and receiver, at least at the meaning like that. It seems it only is the difference in the physical viewpoint. Therefore, after this, the transmitter and receiver each again is restored to the original words, that is, the sender and taker. However, in this case, the above statement doesn't mean that the perception of the sender, the perception of the taker and the perception of the cognition-subject are the same contents. The information, corresponding to the ability of the taker and sender and the ability of the cognition-subject persistently, is sent as the different stimulus or as the part of the stimulus and is received as the information by the taker. Therefore, it can say the perception to the contents of information is considerably different corresponding to the senders and takers. At any rate, it is certain that the thinking is the information exchange involving the value judgement for one conclusion the cognition-subject controls, and also is the logical link of such judgement. By the way, in the general information transmission, it is known that the following factors exist between the sender and the taker. That is, those are the medium having the information of something, are the general rule able to decipher the signals written to the medium like that, and are the general knowledge necessary to understand the above two factors. If they don't exist, the sender's intention can't send, and also can't be understood from the taker. However, if it observes the actual aspect, the form of medium is different corresponding to the thinking subject and the sender and taker or the creature's culture, and so on considerably. Furthermore, the cognition ability, logical ability, the sensitivity, the preliminary knowledge and so on all are different corresponding to each individual. In other words, "the understanding about the forms and contents of the information", "the emotional reaction to the information like that", and even "the understanding about the rule which should be common to all" are different, corresponding to each individual. Therefore, there is the strong possibility that the understanding to the information received by the certain takers is different from other takers even if the takers like that are same kind. Moreover, it can suppose the situation that it can't understand the information at all, the situation that it ignores the information, and even the situation that it can't notice the information. However, it may be needless to say about the thing because it seems everybody has the experience like that. Therefore, it can apply the above reasoning for the condition of the thinking subject itself changing corresponding to the progress of times. In other words, it can apply the thing for the internal information transmission, that is, the thinking. And, it shows that there is the possibility that the contents of the information the said taker understands and his conclusion in the thinking are changed by that taker(future sender) always, because of the change of his logic ability and because of the change of the contents of his memory as well. In passing, it can classify the change like that as evolution, degeneration, elimination, distortion, and so on. Since the above statements may be well-known fact, either, it may be needless to state it. But, it dared to state it because it is the most basic factor for evolution. 11-2 :Evolution of information and the evolution theory. At the part one of this knot, several fundamental points to consider about the information were stated. Then, it showed the taker's understanding about the one information isn't always the same as the sender's understanding or other takers' understanding. Therefore, if it recollects the actual aspect of the information transmission, it can think that the taker like that acts as the following sender, that is, the relay point or translator or reviser and so on when that taker receives the one information from the sender. In other words, the sender like that transmits the information to the next taker, copying it or translating it or distorting it. However, there may be the person thinking that the taker doesn't always act as the sender. But, when one stimulus is received as one information by one taker, that information is kept into the taker as the memory. And, it is the result of its thinking because it is that it memorizes the experience with perceiving the stimulus like that to be the certain information. In other words, at that time, it is that the taker is the sender for himself at least about the said information. Therefore, it can say the information exists upon the chain of the various senders and takers always. And, it is showing that all the sender and taker is existing also as the medium apart from the ego. Thereupon, for the aspect of information transmission like that, it thinks to use the stated equation in the 4th knot. In passing, this equation as proto-type was the following equation. A= outside environment + inside environment + a hereditary factor administering the form of a living body. Thereupon, in this case, the A of the left side is the one set of the information a thinking subject understands. In passing, the information it states here includes not only the contents(information as the narrow meaning) of the information but also the information's form to be recognized as the medium and rule or other usually. It is because it seems those are the concept hard to separate if it observes the actual aspect of the information transmission. In other words, it is because it seems the information's form also is a part of the information's contents not only as the information showing the existence of information but also as the emotional meaning. Thereupon, for the time being, the above equation is revised to the next equation. A = outside environment + inside environment + a inborn factor(or a receiver's original internal factor) to perceive a information. In this case, the outside environment is the stimulus to be gotten as the information from the outside world. Moreover, the concept of the stimulus like that includes the "Aa", that is, the information functioning as direct chance which brings the "A". And, the inside environment is the already acquired information by the said thinking subject, and is the information which is concerned in the formation of the "A". Moreover, the concept of the inside environment includes also the "Ab" ,that is, the former information to be replaced to the "A". Of course, there is the possibility the "A" and the "Aa" and the "Ab" each are the blank if it sees it logically. In passing, the cases like that occur because of "the erasure of the information", "the disappearance of the information", and "the situation that the said cognition-subject can't perceive the given stimulus as the information". And, it can say the whole of the information's acquired form and contents(as the narrow meaning) is the culture if it thinks it about the human society. As it stated before, it is because the form of information is the information for showing the existence of the information. Moreover, it is because it adds the emotional meaning to the contents of the information. In passing, it is natural that the contents of information in narrow meaning include the emotional understanding. Then, the "inborn factor to perceive a information" means "the information of genes",�@or "instinct", or "the inborn form of the information", and so on. And, the "a receiver's original internal factor", if it can regard each material reaction as the aspect of the information transmission, is the concept to be used though it doesn't know whether it can meet with the persons' approval. But, since it doesn't seem there is the emotional reaction for the material phenomenon, the result of such information processing may be unchangeable always if other factors all are in the fixed condition. Or else, would the emotional reaction of the organism also only be the result of the complicated material reaction ? However, it can't state the conclusion at once because there is the deeper problem in the undercurrent of that problem. By the way, the members of the above equation each are variables for the vector of change of information when the thinking subject tries to form the "A" with the concrete information(contents and form) to substitute for each member. And, those members also are the change members for the information's contents and form, until the time that the cognition-subject and the information to be selected for the above equation are decided concretely. In this case, the change member is set to be substituted in the concrete concept. Not until it substitutes the concrete concepts for the change members, corresponding to the circumstances, it can use the members of the equation as the variables for the vector("A") of change of information like that. Therefore, the contents of the information appearing to the "A" are the information to be perceived actually by one individual or one organ or by one living body or by other. Furthermore, since it already stated the detailed explanation about the prototype of the above equation in the 3rd knot and the 4th knot, please see it. So, if the above logic can get the approval, it can express the formation of the information and the information transmission, with the chain of the next equations. A1 = outside environment(Aa2+other factors) + inside environment(Ab2+other factors) + a inborn factor(or a receiver's original internal factor) to perceive a information. A2 = outside environment(Aa3+other factors) + inside environment(Ab3+other factors) + a inborn factor(or a receiver's original internal factor) to perceive a information. ||||| A(n-1) = outside environment(Aa n+other factors) + inside environment(Ab n+other factors) + a inborn factor(or a receiver's original internal factor) to perceive a information. The appended number to the A or Aa or Ab each expresses the converse turn of the time. And, needless to say, the "A" not only is formed from the thinking subject's thinking, but also is the information to be sent to the outside world. Therefore, the "A1" is the newest information to be sent to the last taker at the said time. And, it is natural that it includes not only the contents of the information like that but also that form. Then, the "A2" is the information to become the "Ab2" as for the said thinking subject, is the information to become the "Aa2" as for other thinking subject. Therefore, the chain of the above equations expresses not only the actual aspect of the information transmission but also the process of thinking. And, if it observes the aspect of the above equations, it seems the formation of the information in the "A" is affected more from the outside environment and inborn factor as it retrogresses to the past. It is because it seems the contents and volume of the information in the member of the inside environment becomes poorer as it retrogresses to the past. And, it seems it tallies strangely to the process of evolution. It is because it seems that evolution materializes on the new combination of the genetic information or on the new construction of the genetic information under the change of the outside environment. In other words, it seems that evolution is the result of the said living body's internal reaction finally. Of course, it is natural that the reaction like that occurs with the said genes' perceiving as the information the stimuluses brought from the outside environment of them. Therefore, it seems it can apply the chain of above equations also for evolution as well. By the way, if it observes the chain of the equations, it seems the starting point about formation of the information is the physical stimulus brought from the natural phenomenon. Then, it seems the various stimulus not physical follows the physical stimulus. And, the stimulus like that is born by the economical phenomenon and the social phenomenon, and so on. It is natural that the stimulus like that is the mental stimulus. However, it is certain all the stimulus are based on the physical stimulus finally, apart from a ghost, and so on. It is because our form to perceive a information is like that because of the relationship of the cognition-subject and its object. For the time being, there is nothing of way but to say like that. At any rate, it is certain that all the stimulus to be perceived as the information acts as the mental stimulus at least for the living body finally. If it observes the chain of equations, it can notice the stimulus from the outside environment and the inside environment and even the stimulus from inborn factor(or a receiver's original interior factor) to perceive a information are decided as certain information from the relation of these physical stimulus and cognition-subject. Therefore, it seems that physical existence itself acts not only as the medium, but also as the information under the certain circumstances. In other words, for the certain cognition-subject, it seems the certain physical stimulus holds the certain information. Furthermore, it seems the information even is the core of the physical existence if it can regard the physical reciprocal reaction as the aspect where the information is exchanged. However, it thinks to examine this detail in other opportunity because it seems it strays from the theme a little. By the way, the "inborn factor(or a receiver's original interior factor) to perceive a information" is the information acting for the management of the information. Therefore, the sender of the information like that is the gene, instinct, and so on if it says it with the general understanding. And, it can substitute the inborn factor for the left side, that is, the "A" because it is the information persistently. Therefore, there is the possibility the information like that is changed as evolution or degeneration, and so on. And, it seems it has the same meaning as the aspect of evolution of creature which was stated in the 4th knot. In other words, if it sees the chain of the equations, it can say that evolution of the information gives the organism the birth, and makes the organism evolve. And, it can apply this logic also for the evolution of the society or computer or various technology as well if leaving the consideration about the cognition-subject. In other words, if the information like that is put on the certain environment, it seems it makes the contents and form of the information evolve, leads them to more accurate structure. Therefore, it can say the evolution of various phenomenon including the creature is evolution of information fundamentally and finally. 11-3:Thought and the cognition-subject In the part one of this knot, it stated that the behavior called the thinking is the process of the information transmission involving the value judgement for one conclusion under the cognition-subject's control. Namely the thinking is the logical link of the judgement like that. In passing, the value judgement like that includes not only the intuitive judgement, emotional judgement, and so on, but also the logical judgement. And, as it stated before, it doesn't seem the logical link like that is confined to only the inside of the said cognition-subject. Rather, it also seems it should consider the link like that, expanding it to the relationship of the said cognition-subject and the outside world. In other words, since it seems the material reaction also occurs under the logical formula corresponding to each reaction, it seems it shouldn't think the thinking to be the closed system if it thinks it can link the logical formula like that to the thinking. Therefore, it has to think that all the thinking is based on the predecessors' wisdom and on the others' wisdom continuing to evolve since the birth of the universe. In passing, in this case, the "others' wisdom" includes the stimulus brought from the genetic information and instinct, and from the natural phenomenon. Therefore, it is certain that evolution of creature or the progress of society is based on the accumulation of the wisdom like that. In connection with the thing, it seems it has to do the hard mental training for the works like that if trying to think about something with accepting the various information from his cells, and so on and from the outside world. And, since the preconception, the desire of self-interest and jealousy, and so on mislead the thinking, the cognition-subject has to be free against those obstacles at least at that time. Of course, it seems the strong will to try to do the perception is necessary in this case. All the organisms, to make their lives continue, did evolution, while making oneself adapt to the environment with perceiving as information the stimulus to come from the outside world. And, we are continuing to evolve even now. Therefore, the mankind already may have the ability to understand as the information the unknown stimulus or seemingly meaningless stimulus. Or, it rather may be better to say the mankind is evolving so that it may get the ability like that if it does a kind of mental training. In passing, the conception of the "strong will to try to do the perception" was conceived out of the idea of Empedokles. At any rate, if there is the excellent person able to carry out the training like that, understanding the thing, there is the possibility the person like that is the true genius or the true prophet. However, even if there is the person like that, he will not try to issue his prophecy. By the way, it is certain that the brain and the society, and so on degenerate or decline about their ability and power if their various information isn't revised and if it also isn't renewed. In other words, it doesn't seem that it should confine the information transmission to the narrow extent if the society tries to make the lives continue. However, if it observes our society, especially now, the frequency of information transmission between each generation is becoming low increasingly. Moreover, the certain organizations often conceal the certain important information. It is the very unfortunate situation for the society and the individuals. Or, would it be better to say the society like that is in the very dangerous circumstances ? It is because the circumstances like that bring the degeneration of culture. And, as it stated before, the culture is the mental footing of civilization. Therefore, the degeneration of culture like that makes the centripetal force of society weak whether it likes it or not. It seems it is natural that the weak centripetal force makes the society degenerate anyhow. But, it necessarily isn't that it can maintain the society, only with keeping the usual culture as it is so. Since it rather often obstructs evolution of the information and also culture, it also spoils the vitality of the society. We, especially the people of youth layer have the ability to send to the future the new information, absorbing the usual culture or showing the antithesis of the culture like that, or sublating them. And, the ability like that exists to be used. The people of youth layer especially have to use the ability like that in full power for our future society, with learning the past culture and remaking it. Needless to say, it is because they make the future society. However, who or what would have given us the ability like that why ? It stated before that the thinking always isn't the works of only brain. In other words, it can't but think that the cells and outside world, and so on of the said living body also shoulder the function like that. The many of information accumulated until now are transmitted to the future takers together with the new information to be added by the present takers to be supposed to be the future sender if the above-mentioned equations are proper. By any chance, wouldn't it seem it shows that the space-time itself is the existence like the brain ? At least for me, it seems that the whole of the various information transmission and all the thinking are the process of the certain large scale thinking someone does. It is because it seems that all the stimulus in the space-time are the information for the unidentifiable existence like that. If so, we each may be one process of the thinking like that, and also be the eyes and ears of the existence like that. Or else, if it supposes the aspect in which the chain of the equations materializes as the phenomenon, it may be able to think that the existence like that is me as for me, and is you as for you. About the thing, what kind of impression would you nurse ?
10th knot NEXT PAGE
cotosiro