Well-informed vs. Well-dated
Let me go into psychology on the distinction Krassimir raised. We have
quite different associations on “She is a well-informed person” compared to
“She is a well-dated person”.
One wonders, whether the connotations of “even” and “odd” (in German:
“gerade” and
In sum,
I will never use anymore in my papers the useless term "information".
--
Inviato da Libero Mail per Android___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Dear FISers,
After the provided long list of completely different definitions of the term
"information", one conclusion is clear: there is not a scientific, unique
definition of information.
Nobody of us is able to provide an operative framework and a single (just one!)
empirical testable
Jose,
I agree that the semantic and physical notions of ‘information’ are
intertwined, and I think we can be more explicit about how the are related. I
claim that physical information is general, while semantic information is
merely a subset of physical information. Semantic information is
Dear all,
What if, in order to understand information and its relationship with data
and meaning, we distinguish the kind of system we are talking about in each
case?
We may distinguish systems by their type of operation and the form of their
selforganization. There are living systems, mind
Dear Krassimir et al.,
Your post provides an example of the importance that semantics plays in our
discussions. I have suggested on several occasions that statements about
‘information’ should explicitly distinguish between a purely heuristic
definition, such as those involving ‘meaning’, and
Dear colleagues,
Using the concept of "data", one loads the discussion with an ontology.
"Data" is "given" or "revealed" by God. (In antiquity, the holy was
hidden and guarded by priests, but Christianity brought the idea of
Revelation.) In physics, one talks about "data" and "nature" as
Hi Fisers,
The following set of words tend to occur together in discussing "information":
1) data
2) information
3) knowledge
4) meaning
5) communication
6) message
7) messenger
8) language
9) coding
10) sign
11) interpretation
12 interpreter
13) objective informaiton
14)
Dear Joseph, Pedro and FISers,
On 02 Oct 2017, at 10:45, Joseph Brenner 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
Dear John,
It is interesting you bring us to the Interpretant in the Peircean triad where
“meaning” is indeed key.
The Interpretant is understood as the meaning of a sign, created by the mind of
the Interpreter (Nöth, Handbook of Semiotics).
But the triad Sign/Object/Interpretant does not
Dear Krassimir,
Data is that what we see by using the eyes.
Information is that what we do not see by using the eyes, but we see by
using the brain; because it is the background to that what we see by using
the eyes.
Reminder:
3) Definition
>From “Natural Orders”:
8.3.3.3 Information is
Dear John and FIS Colleagues,
I am Computer Science specialist and I never take data to be information.
For not specialists maybe it is normal "data to be often taken to be
information" but this is not scientific reasoning.
Simple question: if "data = information", why we need both concepts?
Dear list,
As Floridi points out in his Information. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2010. A volume for the Very Short Introduction series. data is
often taken to be information. If so, then the below distinction is
somewhat arbitrary. It may be useful or not. I think that for some
13 matches
Mail list logo
