cognitive processes

Albertina Lourenci lourenci at
Thu Dec 14 11:59:01 UTC 2000

Hi Selfers:

I have taken the liberty to resend part of Jecel's message
to the Self list because I think it is fundamental for
computer scientists to understand how artists think.

 > É que eu tento ser sempre gentil, certo? Eu disse que você deveria
> > reconsiderar se realmente entendeu todos aqueles papers de
> > orientada a objetos.
> >
Translating: I try to be always gentle, OK?
Indeed you are one of the most polite, detached person I have ever met.
You let one "be"!!
I said you should reconsider if you really understood those papers
about OO programming.
> Quais papers?
Which papers?
        Honestly this kind of analysis I cannot even read.
        What's wrong here? I do not know because I am able
        to follow detailed papers like those written by
        Luca Cardelli or the above written by Ole Agesen.

Indeed Randy also called my attention  graceffully about   my
impressions  on Ole Agesen's paper!
Of course I have not understood the way you do. I thank you for
the explanation.But
what matters is that it touched  the core of the incongruencies
I was having with the Beta Language and motivated me to
study Self!  The learned lesson from this paper was my change
to Self! What's wrong with this?

> Acho que estou entendendo tao bem que os papers que
> estou pegando simplesmente reforcam as minhas ideias, como o do
> Amnon que critica claramente a metodologia do Bosch.
Albertina: I think I am understanding so well that the papers
I am reading simply enhance my own ideas, like that from Amnon
Giving the Quality a Name JOOP June 1998 where he criticizes
Bosch's methodology.

Você tem uma tendencia de ouvir o que você está pensando, e não o que
as pessoas estão falando. Isto também vale para papers que você lê, de
modo que quase qualquer coisa vai reforçar suas idéias. Eu estava
tentando alertar você para tomar cuidado com isso.

You have a trend to listen  to what you are thinking, and not
what people are talking! This also holds for the papers you read, so
almost anything will enhance your ideas. I was trying to warn you to
be careful.

I know you are an excellent listener! While I am with people  I talk too

I always hear my inner voice.  Abstract painters like Kandinsky
taught  one to do so. Curiously I love Kandinsky and Klee, they are part
my inner self. I had studied them for two months this years. Curiously
 I was reading the book The rethorics of purity. The author criticizes
Kandinsky and Mondrian severely. I love Klee, Mondrian and Kandinsky
above  all. Yet although he does not grasp what is best in those
I realized his criticism was proper.  Then in my post-doctorate report
I emphasized especially Robert Rauschenberg who is the opposite of
Kandinsky. He gathered garbage on the streets of New York to
accomplish his work. Certainly Kandinsky would never do this. He is
concerned with the divine.  Since dadaists and so on want to smash
Kandinsky's lightness, I only selected one of his pictures to show
that he opened the way to organic trends in architecture. Of course
the last part of Kandinsky's pictures  were not analysed by this
critic of art.
Then in this case I would say he is doing exactly what Jecel  thinks
I do.
So to be faithful to Kandinsky I rather continued his trends  through
Jack Sarfatti's post-quantum mechanics (Kandinsky introduced
abstract painting inspired by the breakthrough in physics) and studied
Leibniz to show the Maurits C. Escher's glory!  Escher like Theo
van Doesburg and Mondrian may be considered artists that
contributed most to the development of free form.
Sorry the critic above could only view they were man-oriented,
did not care about the feminine and so on. He is right!  I realized
through him how much anti-feminine I am. How much I suffered being
this way.

Now an example of Kandinsky's way of thinking.

Yet mimicking Escher's ideas I had to go beyond him. I mean
Escher did not apply the subgroup relationships within the
plane crystallographic groups to transform one form into the other.
(metamorphosis). To reach the essence of the free plan I had to.

So it dawned on me I should study lattice theory. I did! and I
was successful to accomplish the task I was engaged.
I had to write the post-doctorate report who is being analysed
by a mathematician. My supervisor from University of Brasilia
told me that lattice theory had nothing to do with what I was
doing. I told him.
No, reading lattice theory I was able to unfold my ideas.
So I will state this is important. Then I found a passage
where Aristotle explained the cognitive process involved
in the reasoning I unfolded.

But suddenly it dawned on Norai I might be right! He asked
a colleague in Germany about my hypothesis. They concluded
that indeed it could be proved that was harder to deal
with non-normal subgroups due to the existence
of an anti-isomorphism, while normal subgroups
the transition of forms was smooth!!!!

Now coming back to OO programming:
As I told Peter Wegner  at ECOOP'97, although I appreciate
his papers, there is something heavy  about them. But right now
I am reading Models and Paradigms of Interaction  from him
in LNCS 791.

I am loving it because he states technically the reasons why
I kept changing from one language to another. Wonderful
his criticism on functional languages!!!! I am delighted to
perceive that a computer scientist  noticed the real meaning
of interaction!!! However I cannot understand how he argues
so beautifully and yet does not program in Self, the queen-
language in interaction!

The difference between you (Selfers and I ):

I just need to express my ideas in a language that is similar
to my architectural ideas. I master my architectural ideas.
I know how Alexander influenced me to reach the final
conclusions about  how a free plan should be.  This tunes
with the reasoning followed by Amnon Eden JOOP
June 1998  to write his beautiful paper : Giving  "The quality"
a Name.

Thanks for the opportunity to tell you this. This is fundamental
to my inner development.


| Albertina Lourenci                                       |
| PhD  in Architecture and Urbanism                        |
| post-doctorate researcher                                |
| Laboratory of Integrated Systems University of Sao Paulo |
| Avenida Professor Luciano Gualberto, 158 Travessa 3      |
| CEP: 05508-900                                           |
| Sao Paulo Sao Paulo State Brazil                         |
| Voice: +55 011 818 5254                                  |
| Fax: +55 11 211 4574                                     |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Self-interest mailing list