Dear FISers, This discussion stirs reminiscences in me that go back to my readings in medieval philosophy. Please put up with me if I recall them to you.
First, Peter Abelard — 12th century — gave a statue as an example of what a "universal" (information?) is. A sculptor working on a marble block does not create anything new: he/she just moves around small pieces of marble and at the end of his/her work the marble has just changed its "status", it can be called a statue. And the "status" does not add or remove anything from the world, it's not physical. Only God can add or remove things physical from the world. And how do you express this new "status" in linguistic terms ? through a verb-like expression such as "being- a-statue". And a verb-like expression is not a referential one, it does not 'name' anything, it is a predicate. Now If you want to say something about a name-like expression, or a predicate, you have to produce a second-order statement. And a second-order statement does not describe the world, it is a rule or an "inference ticket" (to use Gilbert Ryle's and Stephen Toulmin's expression) to draw inferences about the world. And that's my surmise about information. It does not constitute a principle of efficient or mechanical causality, but it can be a causal principle albeit of a different sort, and therefore it really is something in the world (Wheeler's "bit"?). If you see something as (recall Wittgenstein's "seeing as") a broken marble block or just a lump of any sort — something not infrequent in modern art :-) — you might decide to dispose of it, but if you see it as a statue, you might decide to put it in a gallery. Which is just to say that it is difficult, or impossible, to account for information in terms of something else, but it is perhaps best advised to assume it as a basic and primary constituent of the world. Please forgive me for these untimely observations, but this discussion prompted me to bring them forth. Best, -dino buzzetti On 5 December 2014 at 07:15, Francesco Rizzo <13francesco.ri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Cari Tutti, > Krassimir Markov ha ragione. L'informazione è un processo spazio-temporale > statico-dinamico. Un'opera d'arte o un bene culturale è nello stesso tempo > informato e informatore.Per questo è meglio parlare di tras-informazione. > La Neuroinformation è la più alta e completa forma di tras-informazione > emo-ra-zionale (intelligenza razionale e intelligenza emotiva). Essa si > articola in : significazione, informazione, comunicazione. Triade semiotica > indispensabile per comprendere e interpretare ogni esistenza e ogni > conoscenza del mondo fisico, psichico e metafisico. Qualunque scienza > naturale o umana o sociale non può farne a meno. > Grazie e auguri per Carolina Isiegas. > Francesco Rizzo. > > > 2014-12-04 15:57 GMT+01:00 Krassimir Markov <mar...@foibg.com>: > >> Dear Bob, >> I think, there is no conflict between two points of view – information >> may be a process and it may be a static depending of what kind of >> reflection it is. >> For instance, we reflect the world around: >> - as static - by photos, art images, sculptures, etc.; >> - as dynamic - by movies, theater plays, ballet, etc.; >> - and, at the end, by both types – by static text which creates dynamical >> imaginations in our consciousness. >> Friendly regards >> Krassimir >> >> PS: This is my second post for this week. So, I say: Goodbye to the next >> one! >> >> >> >> *From:* Bob Logan <lo...@physics.utoronto.ca> >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 04, 2014 3:54 PM >> *To:* Joseph Brenner <joe.bren...@bluewin.ch> >> *Cc:* fis@listas.unizar.es >> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] Neuroinformation? >> >> Dear all - I support Joseph's remarks and would suggest that information >> in general is a process that unfortunately is formulated as a noun. >> Inspired by Bucky Fuller's I think I am a verb I suggest that "Information >> is a verb" It is a verb because it describes a process. Although that >> solves one problem we need to be able to describe a set of signs that have >> the potential to initiate the process of informing through interpretation. >> I would not suggest we create another word but recognize that the word >> information has many meanings and that when it is describing a process it >> has a verb-like quality to it and when it describes a set of sign that have >> the potential to be interpreted and hence become information it is acting >> as a noun. I would also suggest that a simple definition of the term >> information is not possible because its meaning is so context dependent. >> This is true of all words but even more so for information. For those that >> agree with my sentiments the above is information and for those that do not >> it is nonsense. My best wishes to both groups, Bob Logan >> ______________________ >> >> Robert K. Logan >> Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto >> Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD >> http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan >> www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan >> www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2014-12-04, at 6:40 AM, Joseph Brenner wrote: >> >> Dear Dr. Isiegas, >> >> I will add my support to the extended concept of information that inheres >> in the work of Robert Ulanowicz and John Collier. I would just add that I >> like to call it information-as-process, to call attention to its >> 'structure' being dynamic, with individual neurones involved in a cyclic >> (better spiral or sinusoidal) movement between states of activation and >> inhibition. I have ascribed an extension of logic to this form of >> alternating actual and potential states in complex processes at all levels >> of reality. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Joseph B. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert E. Ulanowicz" <u...@umces.edu> >> To: "Carolina Isiegas" <cisie...@gmail.com> >> Cc: <fis@listas.unizar.es> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 6:30 PM >> Subject: Re: [Fis] Neuroinformation? >> >> >> Dear Dr. Isiegas: >> >> I envision neuroinformation as the mutual information of the neuronal >> network where synaptic connections are weighted by the frequencies of >> discharge between all pairs of neurons. This is directly analogous to a >> network of trophic exchanges among an ecosystem, as illustrated in >> <http://people.biology.ufl.edu/ulan/pubs/SymmOvhd.PDF>. >> >> Please note that this measure is different from the conventional >> sender-channel-receiver format of communications theory. It resembles more >> the "structural information" inhering in the neuronal network. John >> Collier (also a FISer) calls such information "enformation" to draw >> attention to its different nature. >> >> With best wishes for success, >> >> Bob Ulanowicz >> >> Dear list, >> >> >> I have been reading during the last year all these interesting >> >> exchanges. Some of them terrific discussions! Given my scientific >> >> backgound >> >> (Molecular Neuroscience), I would like to hear your point of view on the >> >> topic of neuroinformation, how information "exists" within the Central >> >> Nervous Systems. My task was experimental; I was interested in >> >> investigating the molecular mechanisms underlying learning and memory, >> >> specifically, the role of the cAMP-PKA-CREB signaling pathway in such >> >> brain >> >> functions (In Ted Abel´s Lab at the University of Pennsylvania, where I >> >> spent 7 years). I generated several genetically modified mice in which I >> >> could regulate the expression of this pathway in specific brain regions >> >> and >> >> in which I studied the effects of upregulation or downregulation at the >> >> synaptic and behavioral levels. However, I am conscious that the >> >> "information flow" within the mouse Nervous System is far more complex >> >> that >> >> in the "simple" pathway that I was studying...so, my concrete question for >> >> you "Fishers" or "Fisers", how should we contemplate the micro and macro >> >> structures of information within the neural realm? what is >> >> Neuroinformation? >> >> >> Best wishes, >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Carolina Isiegas >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Dino Buzzetti formerly Department of Philosophy University of Bologna currently Fondazione per le Scienze Religiose Giovanni XXIII via san Vitale, 114 I-40125 Bologna BO e-mail: dino.buzzetti(at)gmail.com buzzetti(at)fscire.it web: http://web.dfc.unibo.it/buzzetti/
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
