Dear Carolina, Bob L., Bob U., Sören and Krassimir,
First of all thanks to Carolina for having launched a most interesting
thread, of which I have changed the title since the issues are broader than
that of Neuroinformation alone, as Francesco has noted.
My first point is a response to Sören since I feel his book does not address
Information-as-Process as 'physically' as I think necessary. His reference
to the use of this term by Buckland (on p. 77 not 87), (which I had missed
when first reading /Cybersemiotics/), however, is followed by a reference to
information processing. (He later states that a new metatheory is required
to replace the information processing paradigm, and he proposes Peircean
semiotics, whereas I have proposed Logic in Reality.) I also note that
Buckland places Information-as-Process in the 'Intangible' column of his
matrix and one can question the ontological meaning of this.
In the compendium /Philosophers of Process/. 1998. Browning and Myers
(eds.). New York: Fordham University Press, Peirce is represented by four
papers: "The Architecture of Theories", "The Doctrine of Necessity
Examined", "The Law of Mind" and "Man's Glassy Essence". Unfortunately, in
none of these is the word 'process' used, let alone described as a concept.
'Process' is not an entry in the COMMENS Digital Companion to C. S. Peirce,
edited by Bergman and Paavola, so the most one can say is that process was
not a common concept in Peirce. If Information-as-Process is to be developed
as a concept, I doubt that Peirce's semiotics will help.
In the notes of both Bob. L and Bob U., however, one finds workable
properties than can be assigned to Information-as-Process, the verb-noun
dialectic and the concept of real trophic exchange. Krassimir's concept of
information being dynamic (a process) or static depending on what it
reflects does not give as complete a notion as I would like that information
is /in-itself/ a process, even it reflects (refers to) static or abstract
objects. Nevertheless, Krassimir clearly sees the dualism of information as
composed of dynamic and static entities, whose interaction, as in the case
of the first two approaches, can be discussed in the framework of Logic in
Reality. The problem is his use of the term 'reflection' whose nature is not
clear as I have remarked to him before.
I look forward to further discussion.
Best wishes,
Joseph
----- 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
