Very sympathetic on the concept of travelers is that the basic model is that of a dynamic system, as opposed to a Newtonian one, wherein everything stays put or keeps on continuing as having been instructed to do. For the bourgeois, the travelers have a connotation of mystery. They follow paths that are not comprehensible to the philistine, find reason and meaning in their activities which are hidden to the well-behaving, and they communicate in ways incomprehensible to the traditionally learned.
This is almost a revolution that FIS has arrived at concepts that differ from the classical in the points: 1) Time does not stand still 2) There is an element of incomprehension 3) Not the same rules apply to everyone 4) Groups have their own history 5) The own history makes the actions of the group reasonable for that group 6) Even if other groups find no meaning behind the actions of a different group 7) What is known in one group is not necessarily known in other groups 8) Therefore what is information depends on the history of individual groups As much as I like these (and similar) concepts, and advocate their usage in scientific thinking, they make it obvious that the terms “information” and “meaning” have roots in the learning history of the individual. (For someone, who has grown up speaking Klingonese, some noises have meaning and convey information.) Therefore, these terms are not suited to be used in a rational discourse. The denotation of a rational term cannot be dependent on individual whims or subjective learnings (as Wittgenstein has shown). InshAllah, at the workshop there will be a presentation showing how to allow for systems to learn (thus making unbreakable cryptographies, as for the communication to remain private, the two /or more/ participants need to have had a common language-learning phase together, having been exposed to the same influences and having learnt the same “words” /= symbols for denotations of occurrences/ to “mean” the same). Altogether, the concept of dynamic interactions with histories differing as per individual or group, but not unified overall, comes thankfully towards concepts known from psychology and learning theories. Karl 2014-10-27 10:59 GMT+01:00 Francesco Rizzo <13francesco.ri...@gmail.com>: > Cari tutti, > secondo me, il concetto o significato dell'informazione è l'assunzione o > il prendere forma di tutti e di tutto. Vi sono tanti tipi di informazione > che usano unità di misure diverse e talvolta contrastanti. Ad es, > l'informazione matematica si misura in bit di entropia. Nell'informazione > naturale o termodinamica l'entropia coincide con la degradazione energetica > o deformazione (dis-informazione). ma non v'è contraddizione:il significato > è sempre lo stesso, l'unità di misura è diversa. D'altra parte perché > l'informazione matematica acquisti un significato semantico è necessario un > s-codice che impoverisce l'informazione matematica e rende possibile un > significato semiotico-culturale e storico-sociale.Il valore dei beni > (economici) è funzione della loro informazione."La moneta è il segno del > valore" (Marx). La forma del valore o il valore della forma è fondamentale > e fondante. La triade semiotica è costituita da: significazione, > informazione e comunicazione di cui si avvalgano l'esistenza e la > conoscenza in generale. > So di procurarvi qualche fastidio linguistico che potete evitare facendo > finta di non avere ricevuto alcun messaggio. > Intanto, grazie e un abbraccio per tutti. > Francesco Rizzo. > > 2014-10-27 7:12 GMT+01:00 John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za>: > >> Folks, >> >> I agree with Pedro that the meaning issue is important. After trying to >> give a coherent account within established information theory for a number >> of years (starting with "Intrinsic Information" in 1990) I came to the >> conclusion that information theory was not enough, and admitted that at the >> Biosemiotics Gathering in Tartu about ten years ago. I now believe that >> semiotics is the way to go to understand meaning, and that information >> theory alone is inadequate to the task. >> >> Of course information theory could be extended, but I think the correct >> extension is semiotics. As Pedro said, we have not got agreement in many >> years. I think it is time to give it up and move into semiotics if we want >> to fully understand information. In direct opposition to Pedro's appeal to >> the Travellers metaphor, I think that history has shown that semiotics is >> distinct from information theory, and that information theory should >> restrict itself to the grounds that it has already accomplished. Oddly, >> Pedro seems to be saying that information theory includes meaning in >> exactly the opposite way to the way that gypsies do not historically >> include Travellers. So I don't get his argument. >> >> I believe that without an explicit theory of signs, we cannot hope to get >> a theory of meaning from the idea of information alone. I would not be >> upset if I were proven wrong. >> >> My best, >> John >> >> >> At 02:35 PM 2014-10-23, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: >> >>> Dear FIS colleagues, >>> >>> Regarding the theme of physical information raised by Igor and Joseph, >>> the main problematic aspect of information (meaning) is missing there. >>> One can imagine that as two physical systems interact, each one may be >>> metaphorically attributed with meaning respect the changes experimented. >>> But it is an empty attribution that does not bring any further >>> interesting aspect. Conversely we see "real" elaboration of meaning in >>> the cellular structures of life, particularly in brains, and we see in >>> our societies how scientific, technological, and economic advancements >>> are bringing together more and more flows of information around (social >>> complexity and information completely dovetail, and that's a very >>> important feature). Together with physical information (information >>> theory, logics, symmetry, etc.) each one of those realms has something >>> important to tell us regarding the unifying perspective necessary to >>> make sense of the different approaches to information: we have to >>> carefully listen to all of them. Thus, at the time being, the mission of >>> information science --or FIS at least-- would remind "The Travellers", >>> those people in the UK and Ireland, pretendedly "gypsies", who live a >>> nomadic life camping from site to site... It may look unfortunate for >>> the disciplinarily specialized parties, but we cannot settle any >>> permanent info camp --seemingly for quite a long time. >>> >>> best --Pedro >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> Pedro C. Marijuán >>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group >>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud >>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) >>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X >>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain >>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) >>> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es >>> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Fis mailing list >>> Fis@listas.unizar.es >>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>> >> >> >> ---------- >> John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za >> Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa >> T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292 F: +27 (31) 260 3031 >> Http://web.ncf.ca/collier >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fis mailing list >> Fis@listas.unizar.es >> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > >
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
