(message II, responses from Díaz Nafría and Rafael Capurro)


Dear Michel:

Thank you for your good remarks. I agree about both. Of course, data
banks may be considered in the list. In any case, that list should be
too long if it were exhaustive. That is to say, “…” concern to a much
larger list that the enunciated one (and considering length I may say
that there were only 10000 character left to fulfil the “text of
proposal” and we use them all). Anyway, data banks are certainly a
relevant case so they will be mentioned in next submissions.

About (2), I remember the controversy which arose from a question you
stated in December –I think-. I also keep in mind the interesting
answer from Rafael. I wrote him some remarks about the controversy. I
will try to find them to give you my point of view about that
interesting question.

Grateful and cordial greetings,

José María Díaz Nafría


Dear Michel and all,

yes, the formulation "there is information in cells..." could be 
misleading as it means, IMO, there is information "for" cells or 
messages that cells are able to process "as" information, i.e., through 
a process of selection and integration "in" them according to their 
specific way of life. What is stored in data banks is in fact not 
information but potential information for a system capable of 
understanding or "processing" it. The question of numerability is one 
possible framework of interpretation which means particularly since 
modern science, that "we" think we understand something as far as we are 
able to interpret it as countable using particularly digital media. In 
the 19th century this framework was mainly related to "matter" (what is 
not "material" is not understandable). Of course different frameworks or 
(metaphysical) "paradigms" compete with each other unless they are 
viewed as the only "true" ones... And: they have consequences for 
society, politics etc. as we can see everyday

kind regards

fis mailing list

Reply via email to