ELSEVIER BioSystems
First conference on foundations of information science:
From computers and quantum physics to cells, nervous
systems, and societies
Pedro C. Marijub
Department de Ingenieria Electrica e Informatica,
1. Presentation
The final decades of our century have witnessed
stunning changes in the sciences, in technologies,
and in societies at large: politics, economy and cul-
ture. Perhaps there is only one term capable of
summarizing the new traits so distinctive of our
time: information. Computers, molecular biology,
and telecommunications, prime movers of the
present world, are all penetrated by information -
in their history, in their surrounding concep-
tualizations, and in their inner details. Indeed an
information era has taken over an ostensible
atomic or space era. Governments, international
institutions and multinational companies are
working now at delineating what they call the in-
formation society.
But, what is information? At least from the
scientific point of view, information appears as a
vague and incoherent item. Information belongs to
that (not so rare) category of scientific terms
which, after their successful coinage, suffer so
much abuse and overextension that a factual aban-
donment of research ensues, no matter the appar-
ent brilliancy or social acceptance. In the case of
information, the scientific excitement generated
during the 1940s and 1950s - the formative years
of information theory, cybernetics, systems theory,
etc. - has steadfastly receded with every passing
decade and presently has almost disappeared, ex-
cept for some very particular applications.
0303-2647/96/$15.00 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ireland
SSDI 0303-2647(95)01578-Z
38 (1996) 87-96
Universidad de Zaragoza, Maria de L.urza 3, E-XW1.5 .&ragom, Spain
The Madrid Conference has been an attempt to
rescue information as a central scientific tool and
to put it into a new context so as to serve as a basis
for a fundamental disciplinary development. The
novelty of the conference was that, instead of try-
ing a precise ‘atomic’ definition of information,
and actually getting quagmired in it, information
was understood as related to a widespread net-
work of processes potentially involving the inte-
gration of cosmic (subatomic), molecular, cellular
(neuronal), computational, human and social oc-
currences, demanding both a unifving and a
multiperspectivistic approach. So to speak, instead
of the discussion of a single particularized concept,
information becomes the intellectual adventure of
developing a ‘vertical’ science connecting the dif-
ferent scales of ‘informational processes’ - remin-
ding physics itself, which from a pre-Galilean
particularized term evolved towards a vertical
science connecting the previously separated
‘celestial’, ‘sublunar’, and ‘terrestrial’ occurrences.
The contributions to these Proceedings will
clarify the above too sketchy ideas. In the in-
troductory sections that follow, some general
reflections have been added concerning the nature
of the concept (the ‘science’), the relationship it
has with the other disciplines, and the intimate liai-
son it maintains with life.
Ltd. All rights reserved
88 P. C. Mar&in / BioSystems
2. Information: a slippery term
Originally, information was a minor, specialized
scholastic (Latin) term - ‘informatio’ - meaning
the act of giving or changing the form of a particu-
lar piece of matter; it implied, however, a very
sophisticated double process back and forth be-
tween act and potence. From scholastics the con-
cept jumped to natural philosophy and cultivated
language, and later to the emerging scientific
disciplines. It is in the 20th century when the con-
cept reaches its peak: information makes a trium-
phal massive entrance in the postwar period, with
cybernetics, systems theory, the so called informa-
tion theory, game theory, control theory, the de-
velopment of computers, the birth of artificial
intelligence, the new linguistics, the neguentropy
discussions, the chase for DNA, etc. Indeed an at-
mosphere of tremendous optimism was generated
in relation with the concept. In 1941, in a letter to
von Neumann, R. Ortway captures the mood of
the times when he writes:
‘these days everybody is talking about organization and totah-
ty. Today’s computing machines, automatic telephone swit-
chboards, high-voltage equipment, such as the cascade
transformer, radio transmitter and receiver equipment, and
also industrial plants or offices are technical examples of such
organizations. I think there is a common element in all of these
organizations which can be the basis for an axiomatization.’
(Nagy et al., 1989, p. 188).
Information, clearly was the answer. In 1948, N.
Wiener, the founding father of cybernetics, was de-
finitive: ‘Information is information, not matter or
energy’ @. 132). ‘The role of information and the
technique of measuring and transmitting informa-
tion constitute a whole discipline for the engineer,
for the physiologist, and for the sociologist’
(Wiener, 1948, p. vii)
But perhaps the time was too short, and the
theories and disciplines contained too many gaps.
Somehow, the concept became confusingly en-
tangled in too many places. Looking in retrospect
it is easy to appreciate a process of conceptual de-
gradation and loss of confidence - the hegemony
won by the sciences of the arttjkial (Simon, 1969)
during this time was not alien to that. Progressive-
ly, in spite of its tremendous potential, informa-
38 (1996) 87-96
tion was felt by the new generations of scientists
coming to these interdisciplinary fields more as a
source of misunderstanding and paradoxes than as
a source of enlightenment. A recent comment
(1989) on information theory by E. Wigner il-
lustrates the prevalent change of mood:
‘The present information theory is entirely uncharacteristic and
I think it would be time to change it. But I have a very hard
time with it. I have not succeeded. Perhaps I should not have
mentioned it because it is not good to admit that one tries to
do something and is not able to do it’ (p. 256).
Certainly information has become ‘Jack of all
trades’. During these decades it has been en-
tangled:
- with the formulation of the second law and the
concept of entropy (e.g., the discussions on
Maxwell’s Demon);
- with the measurement process in quantum
theory;
- of course with Shannon’s information theory;
- with non-equilibrium systems and non-linear
dynamics;
- with cellular DNA and the enzymatic pro-
cesses;
- with the evolution of living beings and the
status of Darwinism;
- with the measurement of ecological diversity;
- with the origins and evolution of nervous
systems;
- with the functioning of the brain;
- with the nature of intelligence;
- with the representational paradigm of AI;
- with logic (logical depth, algorithmic com-
plexity);
- with linguistics (meaning, semantics);
- with the very foundations of epistemology and
ontology;
- obviously with ‘electronics’ and the work of
hardware and software engineers;
- with the mass-media and all the new com-
munication technologies;
- with the theoretical claims of library science
and documentation management;
- with the basic postulates of economy and the
social sciences;
- with political philosophy...
 P.C. MarQuin/BioSystems
The use of the term information in all these pro-
vinces is not incorrect, but its overall coherence
has become minimal. It seems that every aspect of
human endeavour or biological behavior - or
even of cosmic evolution - contains and processes
information; but there is no glimpse yet as to how
such overextended acceptations can be consistent-
ly conceptualized.
The advancement in the solution of this puzzling
concept, entrenched into the foundations of
numerous disciplines, may demand drastic
changes in view - perhaps including the reflection
on what it actually means to establish a
‘disciplinary’ point of view.
3. Information as a science: a solution to the puzzle?
In relation to the above confusing panorama,
some considerations addressed by the Madrid con-
ference seem pertinent. First of all, there is the
assessment that significant changes have happened
in some of the above fields which imply new
possibilities in order to advance towards the con-
solidation of the concept (the ‘science’): particular-
ly in molecular biology, computer sciences, and
the neurosciences; and also in physics and the
political sciences.
The historical parallel with the foundational
period of physics may be illustrative. During the
scientific revolution of the 16th century the very
concept of physics was at stake - amidst a
generalized ambiance of scientific and social crisis
during most of that century too. Intense debates
were raging between the Aristotelian-scholastic
‘old guard’ and the New Science followers:
Erasmus, Luis Vives, Thomas More, Petrus
Ramus, Francis Bacon. A significant aspect of the
discussion was about the meaning of physics as
something in itself, as the ‘substance’ underlying
all nature. As we know well, particularly after the
Galilean and Newtonian developments (and of
many others: Leonardo da Vinci, Simon Stevin,
Johannes Kepler, Rent Descartes), physics was to
become not just a concept but a splendid science
comprising a host of interrelated processes.
The suspicion about the concept of information
is that maybe something similar is happening.
What we are naming under the label of informa-
38 (19%) 87-96 89
tion might become in itself not a concept but an
enormous network of interrelated multiscale pro-
cesses. What sort of processes? Following Con-
rad’s insights (1983, 1984) on the vertical ‘flow’
(cross-scale percolation) of interrelated informa-
tion processes from the subatomic realm to
molecules, cells, organisms and ecosystems, we can
envisage a parallel ‘flow’ of information compris-
ing human societies too: from countries and socio-
economic systems at the top, to institutions and in-
dividuals, and then to nervous systems, and down
to the rest of the scale. How could the milestones
of this information ‘flow’ between such different
‘societies’ be delineated? Let us remark that the
flow of energy from the solar photons to every
level of an ecosystem or of an organism was
delineated not because of the discussion of a single
concept, but because a powerful scientific disci-
pline, physics, was successfully at work.
The intuitive notion of absence may provide an-
other strategic entrance into the intricacies of the
informational ‘societies’. Numerous instances of
informational change appear as temporary
absences or gaps within a complex dynamical in-
tertwining of opposing processes - involving sym-
metry breaking and symmetry restoration
(Matsuno, 1985). Counteracting such transient
gaps or ‘functional absences’ (symmetry break-
ings) within the nested life-cycles of the biologico-
informational entities, from molecules to cells,
organisms, and societies, generally implies a
cascade of upwards and downwards processes.
The functional absences or voids seem to acquire
a state of flux: moving up and down, horizontally
and vertically, fanning-in and fanning-out within
every social level; encountering the appropriate
counteracting mechanisms or not, and being tem-
porarily solved or not (Marijuin, 1995).
Formally, the structural reorganizations stemm-
ing from the solution of these functional absences
at different levels could be related to the entropy
concept (or to Schriidinger’s negative entropy).
The biological solutions generally imply synthesis
(production) and the subsequent necessity of
structural (metabolic) inputs from the environ-
ment. However, because of the current concep-
tualization of entropy, this crucial property of
living beings, the metabolic openness, implies a
90 P. C. Marijth
complicated ‘inverted’ reasoning (Stonier, 1990;
Swenson and Turvey, 1991). The genuine (non-
metabolic) information processes endowed with
negligible energy - e.g., cellular signalling sys-
tems, nervous systems - make things far worse...
Overall, the interrelationship between informa-
tion, symmetry, entropy, and uncertainty is far
from being properly established. At the end it
might imply quantum physics reappraisal
(Conrad, 1989; Rosen, 1991; Matsuno, 1993).
This line of consideration finally leads to the
profound relationship existing between the terms
information and society. It can be argued that the
existence of societies is dependent on the genera-
tion, exchange, and processing of meaningful in-
formation amongst their constituent members. So
to speak, inanimate matter survives passively, just
following the standard physico-chemical laws; but
biological and para-biological societies need be in-
volved in a permanent web of self-modifications
and problem-solving activities in order to achieve
their survival. The life-cycles of the component in-
dividuals appear both as problems and problem-
solving engines, becoming the sources and sinks
for the information exchanges (providing them
with ‘meaning’). This socioinformational way of
existence can be pinpointed in the cell, ‘society of
enzymes’, in the organism, ‘society of cells’ (or
highlighting the role of the nervous system: ‘soci-
ety of neurons’), and within the ‘society of in-
dividuals’.
Thus, the search upon the nature and dynamics
of information would require focusing on the three
above fundamental information-based ‘societies’
(keeping in mind the underlying ‘society of vac-
uum’ and the ‘society of nations’ at both extremes
of the spectrum, and the case of ecosystems having
a mixed condition). However, none of these
societies provides a complete view on information.
Each one provides a unique set of clues on the
nature and dynamics of information; but none of
these societies alone, no solitary discipline, seems
capable of solving the conundrum of processes
surrounding the concept - they have to advance
together.
The development of a vertical information sci-
ence, both with a unifying and a multiperspec-
tivistic penchant, may represent a gradual
/ BioSystems 38 (1996) 87-96
outcome to the puzzle. At the same time it implies
addressing the infrequently discussed issue of the
‘disciplinary specialization’ and the subsequent
‘integrative problem’ of the sciences (or in other
words, the actual problem-solving dynamics of the
system of specialized disciplines). As a matter of
fact the development of the new science represents
a challenge to go beyond the traditional methods
and division of work within scientific com-
munities. As the Madrid conference put it, we
badly need to delineate a ‘common house’, an in-
terdisciplinary umbrella where the cross-
fertilization of such diverse insights might take
place in a new type of multidisciplinary envi-
ronment.
4. Information science and the system of the sciences
Traditional discussions on disciplines are
centered on reductionism, holism, unification of
science, and the like. However, what constitutes a
discipline is seldom discussed (What does follow-
ing a discipline imply? What is the origin of the
term? Why do we have many separate disciplines?
How do they relate each other - do they work in-
dependently or as a system?). The discussion on in-
formation forces a reconsideration of both the
classical issues and these seldom formulated
questions.
The ‘territorial’ view of disciplines, with the re-
lated idea of fields and subfields of specialization,
constitutes a widespread intuitive notion. The
logical-positivist emphasis on reduction between
adjacent fields has added the concept of hierarchy
and established an order of disciplines parallel to
the corresponding ‘material levels’ of reality (Fig.
1). The pinnacle corresponds to physics. This
simplified arrangement has been endorsed by
logical-positivist authors, systems theorists, and
post-positivist authors (explicit quotations from
Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Kenneth Boulding or
from Karl Popper can be pointed out - see
Ktippers, 1990; Marijuan, 1994).
A rather different picture can be drawn, how-
ever, allowing for the superposition or overlapping
of disciplines. Then, two complementary aspects
become highlighted: that basic disciplines overlap
their territories - and in these overlappings new
 P.C. Marijutin / BioSystems 38 (19%) 87-96 91

disciplines are born - and that real knowledge of of them. Finally, socioinformation might be an
any material aggregate forces us to apply a plurali- adequate label for the pioneer insights of
ty of disciplinary approaches and to integrate them McLuhan (1964) and for some contemporary
(Fig. 2). elaborations on political sciences (e.g., De Vree,
The overlapping or combinatory dynamics at 1991).
work among the sciences can be easily observed in In addition, information science may open a
the new diagram. Almost every successive vertical new line of reasoning on the integrative dynamics
overlapping of Fig. 2 makes sense and corresponds of the sciences and the overlapping phenomenon
to an existing subdiscipline: chemical physics itself. Disciplines are no fields by any means,
[physical chemistry], biophysics, psychophysics; rather they correspond to restricted perspectives
sociophysics; biochemistry, psychochemistry which the scientific communities have historically
[neurochemistry], sociochemistry [toxicology, elaborated searching upon partial aspects of reali-
environmental chemistry]; biopsychology, bio- ty. Like the specialized sensory modalities of ner-
sociology [sociobiology]; psychosociology (Fig. 3). vous systems, disciplines provide reliable partial
An integrative dynamics can be observed too. A information about the external world, but in order
spattering of ‘object oriented’ integrative to cope with the (non-restricted) real-world pro-
disciplines emerges in the horizontal dimension of blems they need integration (and overlapping) with
the diagram: engineering disciplines (nuclear, the extra information provided by the other
chemical, mechanical, etc.), physiology (ecology), disciplines/sensory modalities. The sciences ap-
medicine (anthropology), political (Fig.
philosophy pear, then, as a social cognizing system: both in the
3). These multidisciplinary sciences correspond to sense of a plurality of specialized disciplines which
the plurality of approaches necessary for are continuously mixing and rearranging their
understanding their respective objects, now taking contents for the sake of the problems they have to
into account the whole material, industrial, bio- solve, and also as being the result of communities
logical, cultural, and social interrelationships in of dedicated scientists in a continuous interaction.
which these objects are immersed. Again, some of The realization of this sociointegrative dynamics,
these multidisciplinary sciences can be applied out- in the double interdisciplinary and intradis-
side their own horizontal strata, generating new ciplinary dimension, becomes the central problem
subdisciplines, e.g.: bioengineering, socioengineer- in the praxis of science (the reductionist problem
ing, ecosociology, etc. only characterizes a very narrow aspect), as wit-
The idea of information science dovetails into nessed by the continuous necessity of meetings,
this enlarged picture. As a putative vertical science means of communication, interdisciplinary flows,
it creates its own spattering of subdisciplines in the creation of new specialties, etc. The scientific
overlapping with the other existing sciences: infor- method appears from this point of view as the con-
mation physics, information chemistry [molecular ditions to be met for a coherent decomposition of
computing], bioinformation [artificial life], infor- problems by communities of problem solvers
mational neuroscience [artificial intelligence], and whose workings are separated in time and space
socioinformation (Fig. 4). Information physics has (as witnessed by the citation structure itself).
recently been vindicated as a new discipline Although the sciences have become the most
(Stonier, 1990; Haefner, 1992). The recent inter- sophisticated social sensorium, with problem-
disciplinary attempts of molecular computing and solving characteristics at the highest abstraction
artificial life might be associated, like artificial in- level, and have increased - particularly at the suc-
telligence, to the overlappings of a unitary infor- cessive scientific revolutions - the range and
mation science widely conceived too. In this scope of their institutional presence and problem-
regard, and without discussing their particular solving activities, their overall dynamics remains
contents, information science promotes an elegant obscure and largely within the realm of
alignment of these recent interdisciplinary explora- pragmatics. Historically, every emerging science
tions and suggests a unifying sense for the whole has brought new philosophical and inter-
 I I .I I c’ I $ I
lg,l E IAIUI .I
lCl2’2l ,x1 gl
0 l&l ulal a, 1111
------_-__ ---_----_ -------__ -------_---__
atoms physics atoms
--------_- _--_____- ---__--__ engineering disciplines
molecules chemistry molecules
____--____ _________ -------__ -------_---__
cells/organisms biology cells/organisms physiology / ecolog)
-----_____ ---_---__ ---S-B___ -0----------_
individuals psychology individuals medicine /anthropology
__-------- ---_---__ ------___ __---------__
societies social sciences societies political philosophy
--------_- _-------- -------__ -_-----_---__

13’ I I I I I
I Cl I I I I I
I 2 I I I I I I
I Yl I I I I Gl

I 1: information physics
atoms IIII
___------
12: information chemistry
molecules (molecular computing)
__-----__
13: bioinformation
cells/organisms
_--_----- (artificial life)
individuals 14: informat. neuroscience
_----- _-- (artificial intelligence)
societies 15: socioinformation
_--_-----

Fig. 1. The horizontal hierarchical representation of the sciences.

Fig. 2. Vertical representation allowing for the superposition or overlapping of disciplines. The study of objects in the lowest strata shows the highest levels of
multidisciplinarity and complexity.

Fig. 3. Subdisciplines that emerge from the vertical overlapping of basic sciences. Every number corresponds to an existing subdiscipline formed by a basic science work-
ing outside its conventional level, e.g., I: chemical physics, 2: biophysics, 5: biochemistry, 8: psychobiology, IO: psychosociology, etc. (see text). Horizontally, there ap
pear the ‘object oriented’ integrative disciplines: e.g., engineering, physiology, and so on.

Fig. 4. The proposed information science and its vertical overlappings with the other basic sciences. Some of these overlappings correspond with recent interdisciplinary
explorations (molecular computing, artificial life, etc.).
 P. C. A4arijurn / BioSystems 38 (19%) 87-96 93

disciplinary views on the working of the other conference has put the emphasis on the intimate
sciences. Information science, as the science of relationship between life and information - at
‘problem solving’, could bring new insights on the every level. It is a truism that the ‘problems’ of
poorly understood facets of social and scientific countries are solved by institutions, companies,
problem-solving. and individuals; that the problems of individuals
are solved by the neurons of their nervous systems;
5. Information and life and that the neuronal problems are solved by their
populations of active molecules (enzymes, pro-
Under the guiding principles of the sciences of teins, receptors, channels). Every instance of life,
the artificial (Simon, 1969) information had a social, organismic, cellular, has its own resources
predominant anthropocentric nature: it was con- - including the sciences themselves in the case of
ceived as an immaterial component accompanying modem societies - in order to detect, counteract,
man-made artifacts. From that point of view, an and solve its existential problems, passing them,
‘information science’ was founded in the early up and down, or horizontally, to others dimen-
1960s. It was the result of two conferences held at sions of life. How problems in one realm can be
the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1961 and coherently broken down in order to be solved by
1962. underlying populations of specialized ‘microscop-
Dominated by pragmatic goals for more effi- ic’ agents constitutes a genuine algorithmic feat,
cient systems for organizing and storing (scientific) but it turns out to be trivial for the agency of life.
information, that early information science had a Our present system of the sciences has not con-
particular mandate to search for the ‘grand, unify- sidered these informational processes in their en-
ing relationships of human and human-machine tirety. They have been cut into separate disciplines
communication’. It was defined as derived from, that barely understand each other at their borders.
and related to, mathematics, logic, linguistics, psy- The internal continuity of life’s problem-solving
chology, computer technology, operations re- realms has consequently disappeared, and infor-
search, the graphic arts, communications, library mation has been disposed of. But the neglect of in-
science, and other fields - in its own style having formation does not mean that it stops its incessant
a remarkable interdisciplinary breath. Never- percolation: only that our scientific and social
theless, in a decade or so, computer sciences and understanding of its working has been im-
artificial intelligence departments engulfed the in- poverished.
cipient information science communities. Not Two generations ago, some critical philosophers
many authors kept alive the interdisciplinary at- had anticipated these conceptual troubles.
tempt (Brookes, 1974; Scarrot, 1986). Whitehead (1925) called attention to the lack of vi-
Now, 35 years later, the sciences of the artificial sion and superficial thought in the increasingly
are in retreat, perhaps including its latest compa- professionalized scientific communities. Ortega y
nions: chaos science and the sciences of complexity Gasset’s essay on the ‘barbarianism of specializa-
(Horgan, 1995). As the Madrid conference put it, tion’ in the 1930s was a brilliant but unattended
there is now the pervading sensation that it is from warning about the future consequences of the then
the inner working of life, from the dynamics of emerging process of narrow specialization.
biological information, that we should con- Overspecialization and professionalization are the
template the anthropocentric realm - particularly core of the scientific enterprise today. It is a fact
the sciences - and not the other way around. Ac- that the present system of the sciences has con-
tually, from life and information the foundations tributed exceedingly to technological develop-
of all the other natural sciences can be reached ment, but it has become a crippled instrument for
out; we have already mentioned the reappraisal of the solution of our highest level problems: politi-
quantum physics (Conrad, 1989; Rosen, 1991; cal, economic, ecological, international ones. The
Matsuno, 1993). sort of problems where information flows reach
The new foundational attempt at the Madrid their highest complexity.
94 P. C. Marijtuin / BioSystems
We live in an era of dramatic changes -
brought about by the sciences themselves. Direc-
tives about the information society are not enough
to advance towards the solution of the many inter-
related contemporary crises. We need a well
balanced system of the sciences in order to il-
luminate our global use of knowledge and to
improve our social and international problem-
solving.
Centuries ago, it was Erasmus, Vives, Ramus,
More, who felt in their time the necessity of new
science. Like them, we need new science now.
Perhaps the refoundation of information science
will contribute to opening the system of the
sciences in new required directions.
6. On tbe contributions
The contributions to these Proceedings have
been grouped in four parts:
(1) fundamental concepts in quantum physics,
computer sciences, physics and chemistry;
(2) living cells and their molecular components
(‘society of enzymes’);
(3) neurons, nervous systems and organisms
(‘society of neurons’);
(4) information and the organization of social
systems (‘society of individuals’).
Actually every part corresponds to one con-
ference day - the topics were discussed in this
very order - and the reader is invited to follow it,
for in spite of the inevitable overlappings and
change of focus, most of the contributor’s topics
‘flow’ from one to another.
6.1. First part: fundamental concepts in quantum
physics, computer sciences, physics and chemistry
Michael Conrad opens the First Part with a pro-
vocative statement: that the unmanifest properties
of the vacuum percolate through the whole
cascade of informational processes, up to the
living cell or to the intelligent observer
(Schriidinger’s cat included). Koichiro Matsuno
refers to the problem of quantum-inconsistency:
information (and unidirectional time) may emerge
from the quantum formalisms once inconsistency
38 (19%) 87-96
is acknowledged in the internal measurement pro-
cess; then biological information follows naturally.
George Kampis deals with the limitations of for-
mal (computing) systems, discussing the validity of
the Church-Turing thesis and postulating a
chemically motivated ‘self-modifying’ type of pro-
cessing. Yukio P. Gunji et al. focus on biological
computation, language games, and non-von
Neumann systems, emphasizing the aspects related
to measurement. Finally, Tom Stonier discusses
troublesome aspects in the relationship between
information and entropy (say, one of the many
prices that physics has to pay for neglecting in-
formation as a fundamental property of the uni-
verse).
6.2. Second part: living cells and their molecular
components ( society of enzymes 7
In the Second Part, Ramon Margalef
recapitulates the relationship between the living
and the non-living organization, including the role
of information ‘trails’ in the overall structure and
dynamics of ecosystems. George R. Welch in-
troduces the topic of enzymes: their quantum, me-
chanical, catalytic and biochemical properties
represent the ‘rockbottom’ of life (these are the
first information processing devices really equip-
ped to deal with the ‘real world’ problems, and not
just with simplified ‘computer world’ problems).
Ray Paton discusses the interdisciplinary and
epistemological relationships between cellular pro-
cessing and the related computer models (both
biology and computer sciences are eagerly benelit-
ting from such symbiotic relationships). Pedro C.
Marijuin traces the ‘absence phenomenon’ back
to its biochemical and molecular biological roots:
protein degradation (is a cell made up of ‘eternal’
proteins environmentally viable?) Cell specializa-
tion, cell death, and multicellular problem-solving.
Etim A. Liberman and S.V. Minina retake the
enzyme topic from an unusual perspective: that the
exquisite quantum ‘computing’ properties we
observe in enzymes are a necessary precondition
for intelligent life; the so called ‘anthropic prin-
ciple’ becomes a sort of ‘enzymatic principle’
here.
 P. C. Mar&in
6.3. Third part: neurons, nervous systems
organisms (‘society of neurons’)
The Third Part starts with Peter Ardi’s ap-
proach to brain structure and function, from a
monistic (hermeneutic) perspective reconciling the
‘device approach’ and the ‘philosophical ap-
proach’. But Peter Arhem’s view is dualistic (in his
standpoint the intrinsic randomness of molecular
channels and receptors becomes a central argu-
ment). Then Ernest L. Rossi discusses the behav-
ioral and psychobiological aspects of brain
function, including the potential healing repercus-
sions of the ‘abstract’ neuronal problem-solving
(e.g., neuropeptides, neurophysiological rythms).
Deborah Conrad’s contribution analyzes the phe-
nomenon of consciousness and subjective experi-
ence, and how the physical brain can build
‘meaning’. The final contribution of this part, by
Otto E. Rossler, is a synthesis of physical, biologi-
cal, neuroscientific, and philosophical ideas. His
developments on ‘endophysics’ elegantly intercon-
nect scientific with ethical and esthetic aspects.
6.4. Fourth part: information and the organization
of social systems (‘society of individuals’)
The Fourth Part starts with Johan K. De Vree’s
analysis of the basic categories of socio-political
systems: order, information, structure, stability...
Then Fernando Rodrigues-Carvalho and John
Dockery speculate on what does constitute a sys-
tem ‘property’ (they elaborate on previous work
dealing with ‘social entropy’). Two contributors
retake the subject of information from a general
standpoint, James Barham, Peter Fleissner &
Wolfang Hotkirchner, their particular emphasis
being on non-linearity, information and
epistemology; and the development of a unifying
information theory in relation with evolving-self-
organizing systems. Robert Agelink and Nanneke
van der Heijden apply the concept of information
to the processes of ‘steering and regulation’ in so-
cial systems. Finally, John Dockery discusses an
‘improper’ topic: the relationship between infor-
mation processing and warfare. Incidentally, this
topic generated controversy. It is obvious that
/ BioSystems 38 (19%) 87-96 95
and some branches of science and engineering (e.g.,
physics, artificial intelligence) have greatly
enhanced the capabilities of weaponry and ‘war
technology’ - and have received generous public
support because of that. It may sound naive, but
the promise of the new information science is to
enhance the intellectual and moral tools for ‘peace
technology’. The search for harmonious ways of
problem-solving, socially and at the international
sphere, will be a substantial part of the informa-
tion science programme.
Acknowledgments
This conference was launched as a formal pro-
ject in 1991 by Michael Conrad and this author. In
1993, Fivos Panetsos (Universidad Carlos III de
Madrid) undertook the adventure of convoking
and financing it. Later, Araceli Sanchis would
become in charge of the organization and logistics
of the conference. Both deserve the highest grati-
tude. The especial collaboration and early support
of the following scientists has to be acknowledged
too: Koichiro Matsuno, Tom Stonier, Johan K.
De Vree, Antonio Prevosti; together with Peter
Verdi,Peter A rhem, Otto Rossler, George Kampis,
Etim Liberman, Ramon Margalef, Yukio Gunji,
Ray Paton, A.G. Portela and members of the
‘Grupo Forma’ (Lisbon). The University Carlos
III of Madrid (OTRI), the Ministry of Education
(DGICYT), and the Community of Madrid (Con-
sejeria de Cultura) generously provided the
necessary funds. The University of Zaragoza also
collaborated in the support of the conference:
Vicerrectorado de Investigation, Departamento de
Ingenieria Electrica y Electronica, and Fundacibn
Circe.
References
Brookes, B.C., 1974, Robert Fairthome and the scope of infor-
mation science. J. Dot. 30, 2, 139-152.
Conrad, M., 1983, Adaptability (Plenum Press, New York).
Conrad, M., 1984, Microscopic-Macroscopic Interface in Bio-
logical Information Processing. BioSystems 16, 345-363.
Conrad., 1989, Physics and Biology: Towards a Unified Model.
Appl. Math. Comput. 32, 75-102.
De Vree, J.K., 1991, Chaos in Europe: An inquiry into the
96 P. C. Moriiu(n / BioSystems 38 (19%) 87-96

nature of social systems and the methodology of the behav- Ortega y Gasset, J., 1930, La rebelion de las masas (Diario el
ioral sciences. Acta Politica 26(l), 25-63. Sol, Madrid). The Revolt of the Masses (Allen & Unwin,
Haefner, K., 1992, Evolution of Information Processing - 1932, London).
Basic Concept, in: Evolution of Information Processing Rosen, R., 1991, Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the
Systems, K. Haefner (ed.) (Springer, Berlin). Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life (Columbia Univer-
Horgan, J., 1995, From Complexity to Perplexity. Sci. Am. sity Press, New York).
June 74-79. Scarrot, G., The need for a ‘science’ of information. J. Inform.
Kiippers, B.O., 1990, Information and the Origin of Life (The Technol. 1 (2), 33-38.
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA). Simon, H.A., 1969, The Sciences of the Artificial (The MIT
Marijuan, PC., 1994, Enzymes, automata and artificial cells, Press, Cambridge, MA).
in: Computing with biological metaphors, R.C. Paton (ed.) Stonier, T., 1990, Information and the Internal Structure of the
(Chapman & Hall, London). Universe: An Exploration into Information Physics
Marijuan, P.C., 1995, Enzymes, artificial cells and the nature of (Springer, London).
biological information. BioSystems 35, l67- 170. Swenson, R. and Turvey, M.T., 1991, Thermodynamic
Matsuno, K., 1985, How can quantum mechanics of material Reasons for Perception-Action Cycles. Ecol. Psychol. 3 (4),
evolution be possible? Symmetry and symmetry-breaking in 317-348.
protobiological evolution. Biosystems 17, l79- 192. Wiener, N., 1948, Cybernetics: Or Control and Communica-
Matsuno, K., 1993, Being Free from Ceteribus Paribus: A tion in the Animal and the Machine (The MIT Press, Cam-
Vehicle for Founding Physics on Biology Rather than the bride, MA).
Other Way Around. Appl. Math. Comput. 56, 261-279. Wigner, E.V., 1989, personal interview, in: The Computer and
McLuhan, M., 1964, Understanding Media: The Extensions of the Brain: Perspectives on Human and Artificial Intelli-
Man (University of Toronto Press, Toronto). (Ark Paper- gence, J.R. Brink, C.R. Haden and C. Burawa (eds.) (North
backs,l987, London). Holland, New York).
Nagy, D., Horvath, P. and Nagy, F., 1989, R. Ortway’s letter Whitehead, A.N., 1925, Science and the Modem World (The
to Von Neumann. In: The vonNeumann - Ortvay Connec- Free Press, Macmillan Pub. Co., New York).
tion. Ann. Hist. Comput. 11, 183-188.