On communication:
"Communication" needs to be more carefully distinguished from mere
transfer of physical differences from location to location and time to
time. Indeed, any physical transfer of physical differences in this
respect can be utilized to communicate, and all communication requires
Dear Sungchul, I do not have anything against you, therefore sorry for my
words, but your propositions gave me the opportunity to demonstrate the
weirdness of such approaches for science.
YOU find it convenient to define communication as an irreducibly triadic
process (physical, chemical,
Hi FISers,
I find it convenient to define communication as an irreducibly triadic process
(physical, chemical, biological, physiological, or mental). I identify such a
triadic process with the Peircean semiosis (or the sign process) often
represented as the following diagram which is
Jesse, Arturo -- Science is necessarily culture-laden in being motivated
and supported by the interests of the culture affording it. The observer
cannot escape itself nor its position in the world of possibility. The
information sought by scientific means is already implicit in the
initiation of
Dear Pedro and colleagues,
2. Eigenvectors of communication. Taking the motif from Loet, and
continuing with the above, could we say that the life cycle itself
establishes the eigenvectors of communication? It is intriguing that
maintenance, persistence, self-propagation are the essential
Dear Jesse, do not think that scientists are so dumb in philosophy and
epistemological issue as you might imagine... To quote the relativist and
strumentalis accounts, I read the theories of Feyerabend, Kuhn, Popper, van
Frassen, Benacerraf, Laudan, Brigdman, the same Quine, but also of
Wishful Thinking Reflected in the Sumerian Concept of Numbers
1) Introduction
To be better prepared to understand the roots of our numbering conventions,
we have proposed to re-imagine the intellectual innovations achieved by the
Sumerians, while they introduced the concept of positional
Dear Arturo (and greetings to everybody),
Just a few more reasons to be wary of dismissing concepts and thinking that
science is free of them:
The position you are promoting constitutes a pop view (sometimes called the
received view or naive view) of science, in which empirical items (e.g.,
