On 7/25/2010 7:18 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
I agree with Quentin's answer below. When information is processed recursively, iteratively, or hierarchically used to build upon results it can no longer be viewed as conveying the same meaning. An analogy is the meaning of a Book, which is built of chapters, which is build of paragraphs, sentences, words and letters. There is little to no meaning in individual letters, but when organized appropriately and combined in certain ways the meaning appears. Looking at individual operations performed by a machine is like focusing on individual letters in a book.

Your analogy was very helpful. I misunderstood your previous post, sorry.

Would you consider the firing or non-firing of a neuron to count as information?

Yes, I would consider it to count as information, but I think it only counts as integrated information if it is connected to other neurons in a way that 'tells them' the neuron is either firing or not firing, because if it is firing, that excludes certain possibilities, and if it is not firing, that excludes certain possibilities, and so it is informative. I think of it as the neurons being so connected as to be able to 'watch' each other.

Thank you for all of the other explanations you gave. I don't have a response to them, but I do appreciate them. You've cleared up some of my confusion.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to