Interesting, the 'letter' is only literally a letter when a conscious mind
somewhere is able to abstract meaning out of the mutually understood
lingual (alphabet etc) code it contains. Otherwise it's just a lost piece
of paper.
On Dec 17, 2011 10:46 PM, "Sam Carana" <[email protected]> wrote:

> > When it can not be communicated it is not information...
>
> What about a letter that never gets sent, or gets lost in the mail?
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 9:32 AM, awori achoka <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > When it can not be communicated it is not information...that is the
> essence
> > of vacuum. Hence information must be capable of intelligent abstraction.
> A
> > painting must communicate subjective meaning; sub-atomic forces hidden
> and
> > overt energy forms and dimensions which in turn influence
> > observable/unobservable phenomena....which give rise to meaning or what
> we
> > call 'discoveries'.
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2011 2:34 AM, "Craig Weinberg" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Dec 16, 8:53 am, awori achoka <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > Great.  Information = consciousness = being. The only claim you have
>  to
> >> > consciousness is being aware...
> >>
> >> That is the only claim that is required, which is why it is primitive.
> >> All other claims are a consequence of awareness.
> >>
> >> > awareness/sensory perception ...is
> >> > information.
> >>
> >> Not the way I understand those terms. Information is a generalization
> >> about perception which conceives it as a-signifying and independent of
> >> medium.  If I count to ten, what am I counting? Nothing. It's just a
> >> cognitive rhythm and expectation with numerical names attached to
> >> them.
> >>
> >> Perception is an organic physical reality. It is the native subjective
> >> experience of feeling, seeing, thinking, etc. If I am a fish, I
> >> perceive fish information. Information implies an objective phenomenon
> >> independent of a perceiver, but there isn't any such thing. Perception
> >> is always a relation between the perceiver and the perceived. It's the
> >> context from which information (texts) arise. Texts by themselves
> >> cannot exist.
> >>
> >> > Inability to abstract information from physical
> >> > stimuli..invalidates its existence. So, information is a subjective
> >> > inpu/output  of the conscious....with no claim to existence. A plant
> >> > absorbs and uses light  energy, but does not visualize light. It has
> no
> >> > 'information' about the existence of light.
> >>
> >> Sense isn't beholden to information. It is possible to have a feeling
> >> that you cannot understand or identify, but the feeling still exists.
> >> Information however, depends on sense to have any meaning.
> >>
> >>  A plant probably doesn't visualize light in the way that we do, but
> >> it senses light, maybe in a tactile way, similar to how we feel
> >> warmth. Plants bend to grow into the light. Flowers open and close
> >> with the light. They have complex and beautiful visual patterns, so
> >> that could mean something to them. If there were nothing on Earth but
> >> flowering plants, it would be odd for the planet to be overflowing
> >> with florid beauty that was utterly undetectable to anything in the
> >> universe. Doesn't that seem a bit unlikely? Humans and plants both
> >> have experiences of light, but probably very different ones.
> >> Illuminated matter informs them differently.
> >>
> >> Craig
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "Epistemology" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> [email protected].
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
> >>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Epistemology" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected].
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Epistemology" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to