Hi Loet, I love your comment about the two Chinese terms, but I hope you haven't come away with the impression that I have remained in the realm of Shannon information. I have merely tried to take a small cautious step away from “sjin sji” and toward “tsjin bao” -- recognizing that there is much more work to do.
— Terry On 1/31/15, Loet Leydesdorff <l...@leydesdorff.net> wrote: > Dear Bob (and colleagues), > > > > It seems to me that you drive the problem home by signaling that the use of > the word “information” is very loose in many of our debates. Actually, you > argue – if I correctly understand – that this is rich: words only obtain > meaning within a sentence, and one can import “information” in differently > phrased sentences. :) > > > > The concept that is missing in this context is “codification”. The word > “information” cannot only be used loosely, but also as a reference to a > concept with meaning from theoretical perspectives. I understood that in > Chinese, one has two words for information: “sjin sji” and “tsjin bao”; the > former being Shannon-type information, and the latter also meaning > intelligence. > > > > It seems to that Terry’s information concept in these discussions is rather > Shannon-type. He adds the point that information is relative to maximum > information (which can also be precisely defined using Shannon). The > difference between maximum information and maximum information is > redundancy. Weaver (1949) already noted that in addition to engineering > noise, one may have semantic noise or – equivalently – semantic redundancy > if, for example, the sources of noise are correlated; for example, in > language. This refinement can go further in scholarly discourse where the > use of language is restricted. > > > > Thus, I don’t agree that the journey is the purpose in itself; the > objective > is to move information theory forward as a scientific enterprise. “Wo > Begriffe fehlen, fuegt zur rechten Zeit ein Wort sich ein.” :) > > > > Best wishes, > > Loet > > > > > > _____ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > Emeritus University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > <mailto:l...@leydesdorff.net> l...@leydesdorff.net ; > <http://www.leydesdorff.net/> http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/> SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor <http://www.zju.edu.cn/english/> Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; > Visiting Professor, <http://www.istic.ac.cn/Eng/brief_en.html> ISTIC, > Beijing; > > Visiting Professor, <http://www.bbk.ac.uk/> Birkbeck, University of > London; > > > <http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en> > http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en > > > > From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Bob Logan > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 3:07 PM > To: Pedro C. Marijuan > Cc: 'fis' > Subject: Re: [Fis] Concluding the Lecture? > > > > Thanks Pedro for your remarks. We have not reached our destination as you > point out but the important thing is to enjoy the journey which I certainly > have. It is inevitable that with such a slippery concept as information > that > there will be different destinations depending on the travellers but what I > like about FIS in general and the dialogue that Terry prompted in > particular > is the interesting ideas and good company I encountered along the way. As > for your remark about searching where there is light I suggest that we pack > a flashlight for the next journey to be led by our tour guide Zhao Chuan. > One common theme for understanding the importance of both information and > intelligence for me is interpretation and context (figure/ground or > pragmatics). Thanks to all especially Terry for a very pleasant journey. - > Bob > > ______________________ > > > > 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 > <http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan> > > www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications > <http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2015-01-30, at 8:25 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: > > > > > > Dear Terry and colleagues, > > At your convenience, during the first week of February or so we may put an > end to the ongoing New Year Lecture --discussants willing to enter their > late comments should hurry up. Your own final or concluding comment will be > appreciated. > > Personally, my late comment will deal with the last exchange between Bob > and > Terry, It is about the point which follows: "...there was no thesis other > than the word information is a descriptor for so many different situations > and that it is a part of a semantic web - no roadmap only a jaunt through > the countryside of associations - a leisurely preamble." > In my own parlance, we have been focusing this fis session on the > microphysical foundations of information (thermodynamic in this case) which > together with the quantum would look as the definite foundations of the > whole field, or even of the whole "great domain of information." But could > it be so? Is there such thing as a "unitary" foundation? My impression is > that we are instinctively working "where the light is", reminding the trite > story of the physicists who has lost the car keys and is looking closest to > the street lamp. The point I suggest is that the different informational > realms are emergent in the strongest sense: almost no trace of the > underlying information realms would surface. Each realm has to invent > throughout its own engines of invention the different informational & > organizational principles that sustain its existence. It is no obligate > that there will be a successful outcome.... In the extent to which this > plurality of foundations is true, solving the microphysical part would be > of > little help to adumbrating the neuronal/psychological or the social > information arena. > > The roadmap Bob suggests is an obligatory exploration to advance; we may > disagree in the ways and means, but not in the overall goal. It is a mind > boggling exercise as we have to confront quite different languages and > styles of thinking. For instance, the next session we will have at FIS (in > a > few weeks) is an attempt of an excursion on "Intelligence Science". > Presented by Zhao Chuan, the aim is of confronting the phenomenon of > intelligence from a global perspective amalgamating science (artificial > intelligence), emotions, and art (poetic and pictorial). Not easy, but we > will try > > Anyhow, Terry, we much appreciate your insights and the responses you > have > produced along the Lecture. It was a nice intellectual exercise. > > Best wishes to all---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 <mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> > http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ > ------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es <mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es> > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > > -- Professor Terrence W. Deacon University of California, Berkeley _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
