I'm fairly sure we overplay the human card in knowledge Awori. As Carlos says to a list we can keep adding to - so what? There are prawns that see more colours than we manage and yet we once imagined being able to discriminate many shades a mark of the superiority of sophisticated, western man. We have just discovered that cosmic rays are changing the chemistry of ice on the moon, perhaps part of 'life- giving information'. What forms the address system? Even the I of Descartes reads differently when not alone in terms of brain scans. Much reading of information is only possible by excluding noise - and sooner or later we read the noise too.
On Mar 19, 12:30 pm, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Neil > > You certainly have a touch when posting you messages, and language is one > of your secrets, I can see.. > > I also think ants do not read binaries, why should they. We don't do either > BTW. > But I do believe they "read", moreover, something "reads" > We do that as well BTW > > When they leave a trace for other ants to follow, is not that a reading. > Which is the difference looking at the reading part between humans and > ants, or orchids? > > When my body decides to release insulin before the glucose presence isn't a > reading, > > Can I read glucose levels, well, yes I can, if not I would be dead by now, > but I cannot as well, since I'm tired to look to my blood drops and nothing > comes up :-) > > I (the strange part of the sentence, the I of Descartes) can read these > lines. But why this reading should be any different from that of the ants > or my pancreas > > The only difference in all readings above is their addresses systems. We > humans (a collection of "I_s") cannot read blood drops, and ants cannot > read this post (I suppose) > > So what > > rgds > > Em domingo, 18 de março de 2012 12h29min00s UTC-3, archytas escreveu: > > > > > > > > > > > The aspiration of ants certainly bears comparison with that 'human > > motivation' alleged necessary in our economic system Awori! I presume > > ants don't read binary or anything else in our general sense, though > > Carlos' point is on some other track. There was a time before ants, > > though this presumably bore the information to create ants and their > > chemical gardening abilities, and our meaning giving skills. Meaning > > is generally within a form of life, so Carlos' binary is probably of > > different meaning to an ant, or between me and my friend (though I > > guess of it mattered he could bring me up to his speed). If Carlos > > sends me a letter I can say, in some sense, where its information came > > from, but this clearly leaves out history of a photon stuff. > > We can speculate on the history of a photon, and no doubt on some > > other "particle" if we lived off energy from dark matter and had > > evolved in such circumstances. We might even be able to communicate > > with such a society. Wittgenstein once described using language as > > like climbing a ladder in the clouds! I wonder what our speculation > > would be at a time when we've built an Alcubierre warp-drive, found a > > way to protect its inner bubble from Hawking radiation and are off to > > 'eat some dark food'? Information does not seem static, but to do > > with a context being built. > > > On Mar 18, 12:05 pm, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If the code frame is for instance a conventional alphanumeric list, like > > > ASCII, or UNICODE, or whatever, then any given sequence corresponds to > > one > > > only binary number and viceversa. > > > In other words if you have a binary sequence, or decimal, hex, or any > > > numeric convention, and your reference is for instance the UNICODE set > > of > > > characters, then a given number corresponds exclusively to a given > > sequence > > > in its counterpart list > > > Unless you change the reference list, you will only have an unique > > number > > > and an unique sequence in the given list. > > > That is an universal equivalence. Of course if you change the UNICODE by > > > ASCII, or decide to express colours or music, then you are in a > > different > > > context. > > > > I refer to the address concept in this sense. There is one number only > > when > > > you refer to an address. > > > The address is that unique position referred by that number or any other > > > conventional sequence. And that position is universal regardless the > > > conventional list, numbers, or whatever you use in order to point its > > > location in a given space > > > > An URL serves as an example, it is the same concept by the way. A number > > > limited by a reference frame. > > > > Of course I'm not referring to 'meaning', since I agree then you have > > the > > > human part, different languages or whatever you choose as the > > interpreter. > > > I'm only saying that the address is universal and occupies an unique > > > reference within certain space. In other words, that address cannot be > > > elsewhere. It is an abstraction and as that a discrete element, there > > are > > > not any continuum possibility in a conventional list. > > > > There is no universal equivalence between binary data and any other form > > > > > unless we say there is. It can be expressed in ASCII as well as it > > could be > > > > 24 bit color pixels, Hieroglyphics, dance moves, whatever. Any two > > > > sequences could be mapped to the same number as easily as unique > > numbers. > > > > Genetic codons work this way, with many redundant amino acid outcomes > > to > > > > different binary sequences. . > > > >http://lifeofplant.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-code.html > > > > > Also, it's important to not that converting the string "Fungiculture > > in > > > > the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, beetles and gall > > midges" > > > > into an understandable concept requires a human being who can > > understand > > > > English well enough to convert that alphanumeric string into something > > > > meaningful. > > > > > Craig > > > > > On Saturday, March 17, 2012 1:44:46 PM UTC-4, einseele wrote: > > > > >> Well, if I say this segment in a binary language that will be the > > same I > > > >> pasted below > > > >> In other words, this is a number, expressed as a binary string and > > means > > > >> exactly the same interesting fungiculture idea. > > > >> Want to try? visit any text to binary conversor and copy paste the > > binary > > > >> below > > > >> A binary number or any othe numeric base, or any natural language > > > >> sequence expressed as a number is an address and as that is unique > > and > > > >> universal, since not two identical sequences are expressed by a > > different > > > >> number. > > > >> I just included the sequence: > > > >> "Fungiculture in the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, > > beetles > > > >> and gall midges" > > > >> ... just to save room > > > > >> 010001100111010101101110011001110110100101100011 > > > >> 011101010110110001110100011101010111001001100101 > > > >> 001000000110100101101110001000000111010001101000 > > > >> 011001010010000001101001011011100111001101100101 > > > >> 011000110111010000100000011101110110111101110010 > > > >> 011011000110010000100000011010010111001100100000 > > > >> 011100000111001001100001011000110111010001101001 > > > >> 011000110110010101100100001000000110001001111001 > > > >> 001000000110000101101110011101000111001100101100 > > > >> 001000000111010001100101011100100110110101101001 > > > >> 011101000110010101110011001011000010000000001101 > > > >> 000010100110001001100101011001010111010001101100 > > > >> 011001010111001100100000011000010110111001100100 > > > >> 001000000110011101100001011011000110110000100000 > > > >> 011011010110100101100100011001110110010101110011 > > > > >> On Saturday, March 10, 2012 8:53:55 AM UTC-3, archytas wrote: > > > > >>> Consider this in terms of 'where information comes from?'. > > > >>> Fungiculture in the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, > > > >>> beetles and gall midges. Ants use the antibiotics to inhibit the > > > >>> growth of unwanted fungi and bacteria in their fungus cultures which > > > >>> they use to feed their larvae and queen. Ants not only evolved > > > >>> agriculture before humans but also combination therapy with natural > > > >>> antibiotics. Humans are just starting to realise that this is one > > way > > > >>> to slow down the rise of drug resistant bacteria - the so called > > > >>> superbugs. These antibiotics are produced by actinomycete bacteria > > > >>> that live on the ants in a mutual symbiosis. > > > > >>> As humans we often make much play of the idea that our rational > > minds > > > >>> do the inventing - yet we are clearly borne in more than that and > > > >>> 'science' in some senses is afoot without us. > > > > >>> On Mar 8, 7:23 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > The bit on why everything would not be information was more or > > less > > > >>> > the point of many who taught me Craig - the position being > > 'everything > > > >>> > is information exchange' which seemed to me as helpful as > > > >>> > methodological solipsism. Data is always capta to some extent, > > but > > > >>> > this is a distraction from really doing stuff and not very > > important > > > >>> > in most contexts - philosophy so rarely is. If we wanted > > 'tortuous' > > > >>> > I'd recommend dynamic semantics. I don't see modern realism as > > > >>> > mechanistic and though I agree with your thrust, don't see our > > > >>> > consciousness as necessarily much to do with anything that matters > > > >>> > (though I retain the hope it might be and this may be the mental > > > >>> > equivalent of 'warp technology'). It may be that there is no > > > >>> > information world that we entangle in some analogue of sensing as > > we > > > >>> > do what we more easily regard as real, but then this 'real' is > > less > > > >>> > real than we once regarded it. So where does information come > > from? > > > >>> > It seems to pre-date us as a species, and may be coming from Lord > > > >>> > knows where in this universe or another. We carry the stuff in > > our > > > >>> > genes and these are in interaction with the environment to the > > extent > > > >>> > of massive activity in our DNA as a result of exercise, changing > > what > > > >>> > gets switched on and off. I'm led to suspect another 'meta- > > > >>> > information world' that somehow organises information's > > interactions > > > >>> > in the environment it finds. > > > > >>> > I don't do philosophy largely because I can't shake a stick at it, > > but > > > >>> > sometimes I > > ... > > read more » -- 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.
