Dear colleagues,
I see informational processes as essentially being proto-scientific – how is
any science not an informational process?
The sciences, in my opinion, are different in terms of what is communicated. As
Maturana noted, the communication of molecules generates a biology.
Thanks Loet, that is helpful, and makes intuitively good sense. But I
remain puzzled. I see two distinct cases:
Case 1: For molecules 'communication' consists of interaction between
the molecules themselves, resulting in biology.
Similarly, for atoms 'communication' consists of interaction
Thanks Robert,
I agree with what you say about DNA, so I may be on the same slippery
path to catastrophic heterodoxy!
In responding to the question what is information, started by Marcus,
I was pointing out what seemed to me to be a shifting definition of
'communication', and wondering if
Dear Dai:
To say that molecules only interact directly is to ignore the metabolic
matrix that constitutes the actual agency in living systems. For example,
we read everywhere how DNA/RNA directs development, when the molecule
itself is a passive material cause. It is the network of proteomic and
