Jon A, Charles Pyle, and John C.,
The main point I was trying to make is that the term 'proposition'
is basic, and that information is knowledge (propositional content)
that is being communicated or derived in some way.
Jon
there is simply no reason why we should not take seriously the
lectures where Peirce develops in breadth, depth, and length his
conception of information
I take Peirce's Lowell lectures very seriously. But in order
to understand what Peirce was trying to say, his Century definition
should also be taken seriously:
CSP, from the Century Dictionary for 'information':
3. Knowledge inculcated or derived; known facts or principles,
however communicated or acquired, as from reading, instruction,
or observation
That knowledge may be stated or expressed in propositions or
in some form from which propositions can be derived. The static
view emphasizes the propositions. Information is the dynamic
process of communicating or transmitting those propositions.
Jon
I don't think anyone can fairly encounter his definition of
information as “superfluous comprehension” without being
downright shocked at its novelty.
That is an interesting comment, but it is *not* a definition of
information. His comment notes that sometimes the propositions
that are communicated will narrow the extension, and sometimes
they will have no effect on the extension. Therefore, the
property of being superfluous cannot be part of the definition.
CSP from Writings, p. 1.467
The information of a term is the measure of its superfluous
comprehension. That is to say that the proper office of the
comprehension is to determine the extension of the term...
When those additional propositions have no effect on extension,
Peirce said that they are "superfluous" to the task of narrowing
the extension. But that same information might be useful for
some other task, such as providing a more detailed description.
This example shows how a definition of the word 'information' --
either from the OED or by Peirce himself -- can clarify what he meant.
The word 'superfluous' is part of the comment, not of the definition.
C Pyle
I have always been concerned about the implications of false
information for the definition of information.
Good question. If you define information as the communication of
raw bits (as Shannon did), the question of meaning is irrelevant.
If you define it as the communication of propositions (which may be
true or false) then meaning is required, but truth is irrelevant.
If you define it as the communication of knowledge (as Peirce did),
then meaning and truth are both required.
John C
On the nature of information flow (transfer), I recommend the book
by that name by Barwise and Seligman. It is far superior to anything
written by or about Shannon...
Yes. And note that B & P emphasize the transmission.
John
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
