>> (there will be some isomorphism between a thing and a description of a
>> thing, right?
>
> Absolutely not. Descriptions are not in any way isomorphic to the things they 
> describe. (OK, some 'diagrammatic' representations can be claimed to be, eg 
> in cartography, but even those cases don't stand up to careful analysis. in 
> fact.)

Beh! Some isomorphism is all I ask for. Take your height and shoe size
- those numeric descriptions will correspond 1:1 with aspects of the
reality. Keep going to a waxwork model of you, the path you walked in
the park this afternoon - are you suggesting there's no isomorphism?

> ** To illustrate. Someone goes to a website about dogs, likes one of the 
> dogs, and buys it on-line. He goes to collect the dog, the shopkeeper gives 
> him a photograph of the dog. Um, Where is the dog? Right there, says the 
> seller, pointing to the photograph. That isn't good enough. The seller 
> mutters a bit, goes into the back room, comes back with a much larger, 
> crisper, glossier picture, says, is that enough of the dog for you? But the 
> customer still isn't satisfied. The seller finds a flash card with an 
> hour-long HD movie of the dog, and even offers, if the customer is willing to 
> wait a week or two, to have a short novel written by a well-known author 
> entirely about the dog. But the customer still isn't happy. The seller is at 
> his wits end, because he just doesn't know how to satisfy this customer. What 
> else can I do? He asks. I don't have any better representations of the dog 
> than these. So the customer says, look, I want the *actual dog*, not a 
> representation of a dog. Its not a matter of getting me more information 
> about the dog; I want the actual, smelly animal. And the seller says, what do 
> you mean,  an "actual dog"? We just deal in **representations** of dogs. 
> There's no such thing as an actual dog. Surely you knew that when you looked 
> at our website?

Lovely imagery, thanks Pat.

But replace "a novel written by a dog" for "dog" in the above. Why
should the concept of a document be fundamentally any different from
the concept of a dog, hence representations of a document and
representations of a dog? Ok, you can squeeze something over the wire
that represents  "a novel written by a dog" but you (probably) can't
squeeze a "dog" over, but that's just a limitation of the protocol.
There's equally an *actual* document (as a bunch of bits) and an
*actual* dog (as a bunch of cells).

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 
http://danny.ayers.name

Reply via email to