On 3/1/2013 8:39 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
And therein do you see the arbitrariness of either choice.
The universe is subjective, not objective.
Is that just your opinion...or is it objectively true.
Read on semiotic theory as it will give much enlightenment
on this issue, that is *meaning* versus *information*
The fact that the interpreter can interpret means that the
interpreter already knows the meaning of any accepted
informational form. Isn't this how compilers and interpreters
in a computer work?
Sure. The Mars rover interprets the image of a rock because it was programmed to or
learned to so interpret the image. Its interpretation is realized by its behavior in
going around the rock showing that for the rover the 'meaning' of the rock was 'an
obstruction'. If the rock had looked differently or been in a different place it might
have been interpreted as a 'geological specimen'.
Brent
wrb
-----Original Message-----
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:11 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Messages Aren't Made of Information
On 3/1/2013 5:27 PM, William R. Buckley wrote:
Thinking about how information content of a message
Big mistake. Information is never contained with but
exactly one exception, an envelope.
I made this point with Jesper Hoffmeyer regarding a
statement in his book Biosemiotics, that information
is represented but not contained in that representation.
That marks of chalk upon slate may be taken to represent
information at a meta level above the reality of streaks
of a deformed amorphous solid has nothing to do with
the information represented by that deformation, nor the
increase of entropy associated with the greater disorder
obtained from that deformation; these are but three of
the *informations* to be found upon review of those
streaks. Entropy is how nature sees information (not
yet an established fact but I think the tea leaves read
clear enough) but that has (presumably) nothing to do
with how intelligent individuals see information, or
as von Uexküll called such phenomena, signs.
Most definitely the information is not to be found
within the material of its expression, its representation.
Rather, the information is already to be found within the
interpreter.
But where is it found within the interpreter? When the Mars Rover
receives photons in
it's camera which it interprets as an obstructing rock that
interpretation is "just"
physical tokens too. So isn't it a matter viewpoint whether to look at
the causal chain of
tokens or look at the behavior and call it interpreting information?
Brent
That which is information is so by virtue of the acceptor
of that information; else, it is noise.
And, write the information on a piece of paper and seal
the paper within an envelope and you may justifiably
claim that the information is contained; else, you are
deluding yourself.
has an inversely proportionate relationship with the
capacity of sender and receiver to synchronize with
each other.
....<snip>
wrb
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-
list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
