I made the painting shown in the header image, a few years ago, in the earlier days of clarifying my approach. I have a much better photo in my image library but this will do for now. In doing the painting, organising and unifying all of its elements I was reflecting on consciousness as an aspect arising out of the material body. I see the painting itself, as a scenario in which the mind and body are cultivated inseparably. In the painting, I also wanted to imply the living nature of the body due to the permeability of the edge between the internal and external environment; the edge, non-existent in effect being represented instead by an interspace, making the invisible, visible.
(header image: oil on aluminium 25 x 25cm)
Practopoiesis is a term from the world of neuroscience
I feel that there is a potential commonality between practopoiesis and if so, what?
I would like to look into this – find how to clarify/define something out of this because as it would shape a connection with a field of discipline different to painting, but through an approach which has arisen purely through painting
Danko Nikolic (Practopoiesis researcher) quote from above link
Practopoiesis is a theory of how life organizes including the organisation of the mind and practopoiesis proposes the principle by which adaptive systems function.
paraphrasing, could I, perhaps, begin by suggesting that:
Pictopoiesis is a theory of how a picture/painting can be organised, as evidenced by my own paintings
Note to Self:
The mind/body problem and Artificial Intelligence – a very up-to-the-minute topic and potentially adds historical (contemporary) context to my work as I reflect as to whether it is possible that my painting, how it is organised, and how that organisation has been derived, in some way contribute to the field of neuroscience research or artificial intelligence (cybernetics).
The quote below is from within the field of research concerned with practopoiesis. I think I must soon try and contact Danko Nikolic and hope maybe to begin a conversation but exactly how to phrase this in my first approach to him?
http://www.danko-nikolic.com/practopoiesis/
The reason why we are conscious and machines are not, is that our minds are interacting with the surrounding world while undergoing the process of thought, and machines are not — machines recode inputs into symbols and then juggle the symbols internally, devoid of any further influences from the outside.
Interesting!