Jerry --
List, Pedro, Bob:
A modestt proposal
-snip-
So, where does this Peircian categorification of the kinds or sorts
of information lead?
I suggest that Stan's usage of the term "valency" of information may
be a useful name for the values of information in the respective
systems that is being referred to. The polyvalency of biosemiotic and
cultural information is already well-established in practice.
Does "polyvalency" signify an organization capable of multiple
interpretations
(polysemy)?
The concept of polyvalent information provides a reasonable term to
describe the exactness of the reproduction of biological structures,
of genetic inheritance.
Certainly genetic information can have many different 'interpretations'
according to conditions / context.
The conundrums over the questions of symmetry and asymmetry remain
open for description in logical terms of the valency of the
symbolization of information used for communication. For example,
can practical communication be achieved with an infinitely
polyvalent "chunk" of information?
Is this meaning interpreted in an indefinite number of contexts?
Or, is this merely a useful
metaphor? How does the Barwise metaphor of categorical information
fit into the concept of polyvalency? Can one actually encode
information into infinite groups or is this merely a mathematical
metaphor?
Numerous other questions can be raised from the logical proposition
that communication implicitly connects via valencies.
The connection to valency in semiotics would be via different systems of
interpretance. It would be promoted, presumably, by some degree of vagueness
in the information.
STAN
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
[email protected]
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
