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
