Caro Pedro,
ho inviato un brevissimo messaggio a John Collier, ma non è pervenuto. E'
possibile sapere perché?  Se non è possibile grazie lo stesso.
Francesco

P.s.:grazie.

P.s.Caro John,
hai detto in maniera semplice una grande verità. Tutta la conoscenza è
basata sulla legge dell'informazione,  quindi tutte le scienze non possono
fare a meno della stessa legge con una definizione comune e misurazione
diversa. Altrimenti, come ben dici, si crea solo confusione.
Un abbraccio.
Francesco
P.s. L'ho inviato un paio di ore fa, ma non è arrivato a destinazione:
forse per indirizzo sbagliato.

2017-11-06 16:06 GMT+01:00 Francesco Rizzo <13francesco.ri...@gmail.com>:

> Caro Pedro,
> ho inviato un brevissimo messaggio a John Collier, ma non è pervenuto. E'
> possibile sapere perché?  Se non è possibile grazie lo stesso.
> Francesco
>
> P.s.:grazie.
>
> P.s.Caro John,
> hai detto in maniera semplice una grande verità. Tutta la conoscenza è
> basata sulla legge dell'informazione,  quindi tutte le scienze non possono
> fare a meno della stessa legge con una definizione comune e misurazione
> diversa. Altrimenti, come ben dici, si crea solo confusione.
> Un abbraccio.
> Francesco
> P.s. L'ho inviato un paio di ore fa, ma non è arrivato a destinazione:
> forse per indirizzo sbagliato.
>
> 2017-11-06 15:40 GMT+01:00 Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>:
>
>> His server rejects quite many messages (from me too). Send to the list...
>> Best --Pedro
>>
>>
>> El 06/11/2017 a las 14:36, Francesco Rizzo escribió:
>>
>> Caro Pedro,
>> ho inviato un brevissimo messaggio a John Collier, ma non è pervenuto. E'
>> possibile sapere perché?  Se non è possibile grazie lo stesso.
>> Francesco
>>
>> P.s.Caro John,
>> hai detto in maniera semplice una grande verità. Tutta la conoscenza è
>> basata sulla legge dell'informazione,  quindi tutte le scienze non possono
>> fare a meno della stessa legge con una definizione comune e misurazione
>> diversa. Altrimenti, come ben dici, si crea solo confusione.
>> Un abbraccio.
>> Francesco
>> P.s. L'ho inviato un paio di ore fa, ma non è arrivato a destinazione:
>> forse per indirizzo sbagliato.
>>
>>
>> 2017-10-06 14:36 GMT+02:00 Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>:
>>
>>> Dear Terry and FIS colleagues,
>>> I think you make a good point. I was reminded on the problems my
>>> research group has found in the development of our "Sociotype project",
>>> cooperating with social science groups and psychologists. The lack of
>>> communication  in between those closer to formal fields or just within
>>> natural sciences (our case) and the humanities and social science fields is
>>> amazing. From my point of view they strongly defend some form of
>>> "obscurity", in the sense that they do not accept but a total disciplinary
>>> autonomy often ideologically rooted. Perhaps I am exaggerating, as the
>>> intrinsic complexity of those matters is only amenable to "foundations"
>>> from discoursive approaches... Well, in any case a metaphorical idea about
>>> those principles of Information Science is that they can work as "posts"
>>> where new electric lines may be tended, so that they can bring new light to
>>> new pockets within those ultracomplex realms. The gap between
>>> sceince-humanities might be well crossed by info science.
>>> (Finally let me apologize for not having processed yet all the late
>>> messages, I have a slow digestion)
>>> Best--Pedro
>>>
>>>
>>> El 05/10/2017 a las 19:21, Terrence W. DEACON escribió:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I am in agreement with Joseph's suggestion that our discussions of the
>>> foundations of information could be understood as pre-science. Efforts such
>>> as the list of principles proposed by Pedro offer a useful focus of
>>> discussion for working toward a more solid "foundation" precisely because
>>> it helps elicits responses that exemplify the fault lines in our community.
>>> These are not merely points of disagreement but also theoretical boundaries
>>> that need to be clearly identified if we want to seriously map this still
>>> ambiguous conceptual territory. Claims that this issue has been settled or
>>> that there are irresolvable issues involved or that the whole conceptual
>>> territory is useless are unhelpful. We just need to get explicit about our
>>> differences and what motivates them.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Joseph Brenner <joe.bren...@bluewin.ch>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Pedro, Dear FISers,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the 2 weeks I have been away, an excellent discussion has
>>>> self-organized as Pedro noted. Any preliminary comments and criticisms of
>>>> Pedro’s 10 Principles I could make now can refer to this. I would have said
>>>> first that Pedro is to be thanked for this construction. Preparing a list
>>>> of principles involves defining not only the content but also the number,
>>>> order and relation between the entries. Zou, Stan and Ted in particular
>>>> have recognized the existence of the list as such and the work involved.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My own view is that we are all currently involved in reworking the
>>>> Foundations of Information Science. These Foundations are not themselves
>>>> science, but they look forward to the increased understanding of
>>>> Information Science as Terry suggests. I propose the term “Pre-Science” for
>>>> this process activity, a pun on the word ‘prescience’ whose normal
>>>> definition is foreknowledge or foresight. The people who tend to make
>>>> mistakes in this effort will be those who claim that any simple concept or
>>>> set of concepts can do the job itself, supported by claims to authorities
>>>> such as Peirce. Sets of *principles*, on the other hand, are tools
>>>> more difficult to use but they permit directed consideration of several
>>>> perspectives at the same time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Principles are the basis for an interpretation of what is in the
>>>> physical and biological processes that are the proper subjects for
>>>> non-computational Information Science, without – yet – providing any
>>>> explanations. Now this is a lot more philosophical that may have been
>>>> expected when the discussion started. However, today, unlike when Pedro and
>>>> his colleagues started out, we have the Philosophy of Information of
>>>> Luciano Floridi and Wu Kun to work with, as well as my logic. I am
>>>> surprised that no-one has yet referred to Floridi or Wu.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Going back over the postings to-date, I have noted a few which seem
>>>> constitutive of a ‘Pre-Science’ of Information: Emmanuel’s ‘duality’,
>>>> Stan’s hierarchies; Michel Godron’s and John Torday’s bridges to biology,
>>>> Pedro’s reworking of communication, *etc*. I will resist comments that
>>>> the concepts of Pre-Science are to be thrown out as part of non-science or
>>>> ‘just’ philosophy. As Koichiro clearly said on 20.09, information can, and
>>>> in my view is already, bringing in something new empirically to questions
>>>> of space and time.  In the Pre-Science of Information, ideally, it
>>>> should be possible to retain mechanism *and* materialism or realism;
>>>> computationalism *and *non- or natural computationalism; information
>>>> as a physical *reality* and a non-physical *appearance*.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I look forward with great interest to the lines of development of this
>>>> thread.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joseph
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> *From:* Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
>>>> *To:* 'fis' <fis@listas.unizar.es>
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, September 15, 2017 2:13 PM
>>>> *Subject:* [Fis] PRINCIPLES OF IS
>>>>
>>>> Dear FIS Colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> As promised herewith the "10 principles of information science". A
>>>> couple of previous comments may be in order.
>>>> First, what is in general the role of principles in science? I was
>>>> motivated by the unfinished work of philosopher Ortega y Gasset, "The idea
>>>> of principle in Leibniz and the evolution of deductive theory"
>>>> (posthumously published in 1958). Our tentative information science seems
>>>> to be very different from other sciences, rather multifarious in appearance
>>>> and concepts, and cavalierly moving from scale to scale. What could be the
>>>> specific role of principles herein? Rather than opening homogeneous realms
>>>> for conceptual development, these information principles would appear as a
>>>> sort of "portals" that connect with essential topics of other disciplines
>>>> in the different organization layers, but at the same time they should try
>>>> to be consistent with each other and provide a coherent vision of the
>>>> information world.
>>>> And second, about organizing the present discussion, I bet I was too
>>>> optimistic with the commentators scheme. In any case, for having a first
>>>> glance on the whole scheme, the opinions of philosophers would be very
>>>> interesting. In order to warm up the discussion, may I ask John Collier,
>>>> Joseph Brenner and Rafael Capurro to send some initial comments /
>>>> criticisms? Later on, if the commentators idea flies, Koichiro Matsuno and
>>>> Wolfgang Hofkirchner would be very valuable voices to put a perspectival
>>>> end to this info principles discussion (both attended the Madrid bygone FIS
>>>> 1994 conference)...
>>>> But this is FIS list, unpredictable in between the frozen states and
>>>> the chaotic states! So, everybody is invited to get ahead at his own, with
>>>> the only customary limitation of two messages per week.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, have a good weekend --Pedro
>>>>
>>>> *10 **PRINCIPLES OF INFORMATION SCIENCE*
>>>>
>>>> 1. Information is information, neither matter nor energy.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Information is comprehended into structures, patterns, messages, or
>>>> flows.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Information can be recognized, can be measured, and can be
>>>> processed (either computationally or non-computationally).
>>>>
>>>> 4. Information flows are essential organizers of life's self-production
>>>> processes--anticipating, shaping, and mixing up with the accompanying
>>>> energy flows.
>>>>
>>>> 5. Communication/information exchanges among adaptive life-cycles
>>>> underlie the complexity of biological organizations at all scales.
>>>>
>>>> 6. It is symbolic language what conveys the essential communication
>>>> exchanges of the human species--and constitutes the core of its "social
>>>> nature."
>>>>
>>>> 7. Human information may be systematically converted into efficient
>>>> knowledge, by following the "knowledge instinct" and further up by applying
>>>> rigorous methodologies.
>>>>
>>>> 8. Human cognitive limitations on knowledge accumulation are partially
>>>> overcome via the social organization of "knowledge ecologies."
>>>>
>>>> 9. Knowledge circulates and recombines socially, in a continuous
>>>> actualization that involves "creative destruction" of fields and
>>>> disciplines: the intellectual *Ars Magna.*
>>>>
>>>> 10. Information science proposes a new, radical vision on the
>>>> information and knowledge flows that support individual lives, with
>>>> profound consequences for scientific-philosophical practice and for social
>>>> governance.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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 0
>>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>>>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (& 
>>>> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list
>>>> Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bi
>>>> n/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list
>>>> Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bi
>>>> n/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>
>>> --
>>> Professor Terrence W. Deacon University of California, Berkeley
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Fis mailing 
>>> listFis@listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>
>>> --
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> 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 0
>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (& 
>>> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list
>>> Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bi
>>> n/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> 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 0
>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (& 
>> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>> -------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to