Ray wrote:
> Instead I would rather return to the issue of the
> Science and aesthetics of communication
> where I was with Brad. Do you Henry know anything about
> Information or Code theory? Like Entropy, I can write about
> it but I'm not that
> coherent. If need be, I will but I would rather someone
> who has a lower complexity level than mine be the one who
> writes about it.
In all seriousness, I challenge anyone to show there
is any relevance of "information theoiry"
(Shannon and Weaver et al.)
to *human communication* in normal life situations
where acoustic/visual/... signal transmission is not problematic.
I believe that there is no such relevance. And I feel
that the imaginative evocativeness of this theory
is reductive and conceives persons as less than
they have the capacity (as opposed to capicators...)
to become.
"Yours in discourse...." (or, if I was an information theory
person, I'd write something like: "ACK-1")
\brad mccormick
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
