Re: [Fis] FIS newcomer

[HowlBloom]

good points from guenther.
 
see if this helps:
 

If  meaning is anything that a receiver can understand, if meaning is 
anything  that an entity can interpret, if meaning is in the eye of the 
beholder, 
then  how do you know when a thing or a person “understands” something? 
Follow the  B.F. Skinner rule.  Watch his or  her behavior.  Watch for the 
signs  of stimulus and response.  Watch  to  see if the receiver does  
something in response to the stimulus.   Watch to see if the receiver moves. 

from The God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos Creates.
 
with warmth and oomph--howard
 
--
Howard Bloom
Howardbloom.net
Author  of: The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
of History  ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), 
Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass  Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st 
Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New  Yorker), 
The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism ("A  
tremendously enjoyable book." James Fallows, National Correspondent, The  
Atlantic), 
The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates("Bloom's argument  will rock 
your world." Barbara Ehrenreich), 
How I Accidentally Started the  Sixties (“Wow! Whew! Wild! Wonderful!” 
Timothy Leary), and 
The Mohammed Code  (“A terrifying book…the best book I’ve read on Islam.” 
David Swindle, PJ  Media).
Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former Visiting  
Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York University
Founder:  International Paleopsychology Project. Founder: The Group 
Selection Squad;  Founder, Space Development Steering Committee. Board Member 
and 
Member Of Board  Of Governors, National Space Society. Founding Board Member: 
Epic of Evolution  Society. Founding Board Member, The Darwin Project. 
Founder: The Big Bang Tango  Media Lab. Member: New York Academy of Sciences, 
American Association for the  Advancement of Science, American Psychological 
Society, Academy of Political  Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, 
International Society for Human  Ethology. Scientific Advisory Board 
Member, Lifeboat Foundation. Advisory Board  Member, The Buffalo Film Festival. 
Editorial board member, The Journal of Space  Philosophy. 


In a message dated 6/21/2015 7:51:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
witz...@sbg.at writes:



Meaning is a social function (G.H.Mead). The meaning can be  simply 
identifying by looking what habits it produces (C.S.Peirce), the  meaning of a 
word 
is its use (late Wittgenstein, Philosophical  Investigations). There 
remains no question about "meaning" so far. This  problem is finally solved.  


Best
Guenther

Am 20.06.2015 um 22:33 schrieb Jerry LR Chandler:


List:   


My opinions categorically reject the shallow proposition below which  
ignores the foundational logic.


The biological sciences focus on life itself.
The scientific foundation of biological information is included under  the 
notion of Foundation of Information Science.


The adjectives "cognitive" and "computational" and "linguistic" do not  
influence the meaning the foundation of the science, they are merely  
descriptors of sub-aspects of the science or incomplete perspectives of  
biology.


The post introduces the proposition that these three adjectives are not  
even modifiers of the meaning of biology, mere metaphors, each of which can  
carry a vast array of meanings.  


Personally, I am rather fond of elephants and find this slight of  
elephants, one of mother nature's greatest achievements, unwarranted.


Cheers


Jerry




On Jun 19, 2015, at 7:52 PM, _HowlBloom@aol.com_ (mailto:howlbl...@aol.com) 
 wrote:



re: cognitive biology vs computational biology.
 
may i suggest that you add yet one more approach to the list:  linguistic 
biology.  per the work of Guenther Witzany.  also  reflected in my book The 
God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos Creates.
 
each approach uses a helpful metaphor.  no  one approach sees the elephant 
in its entirety. so please let us  use all three.
 
with oomph--howard
 
--
Howard Bloom
_Howardbloom.net_ (http://howardbloom.net/) 
Author of: The  Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
of History  ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), 
Global Brain: The Evolution of  Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st 
Century ("reassuring and  sobering"-The New Yorker), 
The Genius of the Beast: A Radical  Re-Vision of Capitalism ("A 
tremendously enjoyable book." James Fallows,  National Correspondent, The 
Atlantic), 
The God Problem: How A Godless  Cosmos Creates("Bloom's argument will rock 
your world." Barbara  Ehrenreich), 
How I Accidentally Started the Sixties (“Wow! Whew! Wild!  Wonderful!” 
Timothy Leary), and 
The Mohammed Code (“A terrifying  book…the best book I’ve read on Islam.” 
David Swindle, PJ  Media).
Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former  Visiting 
Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York  University
Founder: International

Re: [Fis] FIS newcomer

[Steven Ericsson-Zenith]

“use” is particularly ambiguous. So I do not think, as presented, that 
“meaning” is “solved?” By which I assume you intended to say “what the term 
‘meaning’ is a reference to.”

Indeed, all of these terms “social”, “habit”, “use” are ambiguous.

I believe that the best we can do is to say that a “meaning” is exactly the 
action (“behaviors,” “motions") that is the product of apprehension, where 
apprehension is that which the organism takes from the world. This is not as 
simple as saying “sign” in the Peircean sense, in that the “third” in 
“apprehension” is an accumulative filter.

Quiet simply there is no meaning except that which an organism displays in 
response to the world. I may say that P typically responded like Y to X (in a 
“Rosetta stone” sense), but I can never assert generally that X means Y.   

This view is closer to Charles Peirce than it is to L. Wittgenstein. Both were 
confused by the binary system of Boole - a dualism - truth values must be 
discarded if you are to speak rigorously. This is not to deny the utility of 
truth value systems.

In short, the universe does not care whether or not a thing is true or false, 
this or that. Consistency is a human affair.

Regards,
Steven



> On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:55 PM, Günther Witzany  > wrote:
> 
> Meaning is a social function (G.H.Mead). The meaning can be simply 
> identifying by looking what habits it produces (C.S.Peirce), the meaning of a 
> word is its use (late Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations). There 
> remains no question about "meaning" so far. This problem is finally solved.
> 
> Best
> Guenther
> Am 20.06.2015 um 22:33 schrieb Jerry LR Chandler:
> 
>> List:
>> 
>> My opinions categorically reject the shallow proposition below which ignores 
>> the foundational logic.
>> 
>> The biological sciences focus on life itself.
>> The scientific foundation of biological information is included under the 
>> notion of Foundation of Information Science.
>> 
>> The adjectives "cognitive" and "computational" and "linguistic" do not 
>> influence the meaning the foundation of the science, they are merely 
>> descriptors of sub-aspects of the science or incomplete perspectives of 
>> biology.
>> 
>> The post introduces the proposition that these three adjectives are not even 
>> modifiers of the meaning of biology, mere metaphors, each of which can carry 
>> a vast array of meanings.  
>> 
>> Personally, I am rather fond of elephants and find this slight of elephants, 
>> one of mother nature's greatest achievements, unwarranted. 
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Jerry
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 19, 2015, at 7:52 PM, howlbl...@aol.com  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> re: cognitive biology vs computational biology.
>>>  
>>> may i suggest that you add yet one more approach to the list: linguistic 
>>> biology.  per the work of Guenther Witzany.  also reflected in my book The 
>>> God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos Creates.
>>>  
>>> each approach uses a helpful metaphor.  no one approach sees the elephant 
>>> in its entirety. so please let us use all three.
>>>  
>>> with oomph--howard
>>>  
>>> --
>>> Howard Bloom
>>> Howardbloom.net 
>>> Author of: The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
>>> of History ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), 
>>> Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st 
>>> Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New Yorker), 
>>> The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism ("A tremendously 
>>> enjoyable book." James Fallows, National Correspondent, The Atlantic), 
>>> The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates("Bloom's argument will rock 
>>> your world." Barbara Ehrenreich), 
>>> How I Accidentally Started the Sixties (“Wow! Whew! Wild! Wonderful!” 
>>> Timothy Leary), and 
>>> The Mohammed Code (“A terrifying book…the best book I’ve read on Islam.” 
>>> David Swindle, PJ Media).
>>> Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former Visiting 
>>> Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York University
>>> Founder: International Paleopsychology Project. Founder: The Group 
>>> Selection Squad; Founder, Space Development Steering Committee. Board 
>>> Member and Member Of Board Of Governors, National Space Society. Founding 
>>> Board Member: Epic of Evolution Society. Founding Board Member, The Darwin 
>>> Project. Founder: The Big Bang Tango Media Lab. Member: New York Academy of 
>>> Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American 
>>> Psychological Society, Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and 
>>> Evolution Society, International Society for Human Ethology. Scientific 
>>> Advisory Board Member, Lifeboat Foundation. Advisory Board Member, The 
>>> Buffalo Film Festival. Editorial board member, The Journal of Space 
>>> Philosophy. 
>>>  
>>> In a message dated 6/19/2015 9:22:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
>>> emanl@gmail.com

Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 15, Issue 32

[Malcolm Dean]

Not so fast, Gunther. The meaning of meaning may be solved, but since this
is a list concerned with Information, it remains to show it in a complete
formalism of Information Theory.

By appealing to Mead , Peirce, and Wittgenstein, you are using other files
to justify this field. We see the same behavior in evolutionary theory,
where Thermodynamics is sometimes invoked as an explanatory mechanism.

All worldviews commence with a miracle. Try to accomplish your explanation
with Information, beginning with an appropriate foundational faith-claim.
(Examples: randomness, causality, Observer-Participtor.)

Malcolm Dean

> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 08:55:08 +0200
> From: G?nther Witzany 
> To: Jerry LR Chandler 
> Cc: FIS Science , howlbl...@aol.com

> Meaning is a social function (G.H.Mead). The meaning can be simply
identifying by looking what habits it produces (C.S.Peirce), the meaning of
a word is its use (late Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations). There
remains no question about "meaning" so far. This problem is finally solved.
>
> Best
> Guenther
___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] FIS newcomer

[Günther Witzany]

Meaning is a social function (G.H.Mead). The meaning can be simply identifying 
by looking what habits it produces (C.S.Peirce), the meaning of a word is its 
use (late Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations). There remains no 
question about "meaning" so far. This problem is finally solved.

Best
Guenther
Am 20.06.2015 um 22:33 schrieb Jerry LR Chandler:

> List:
> 
> My opinions categorically reject the shallow proposition below which ignores 
> the foundational logic.
> 
> The biological sciences focus on life itself.
> The scientific foundation of biological information is included under the 
> notion of Foundation of Information Science.
> 
> The adjectives "cognitive" and "computational" and "linguistic" do not 
> influence the meaning the foundation of the science, they are merely 
> descriptors of sub-aspects of the science or incomplete perspectives of 
> biology.
> 
> The post introduces the proposition that these three adjectives are not even 
> modifiers of the meaning of biology, mere metaphors, each of which can carry 
> a vast array of meanings.  
> 
> Personally, I am rather fond of elephants and find this slight of elephants, 
> one of mother nature's greatest achievements, unwarranted. 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2015, at 7:52 PM, howlbl...@aol.com wrote:
> 
>> re: cognitive biology vs computational biology.
>>  
>> may i suggest that you add yet one more approach to the list: linguistic 
>> biology.  per the work of Guenther Witzany.  also reflected in my book The 
>> God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos Creates.
>>  
>> each approach uses a helpful metaphor.  no one approach sees the elephant in 
>> its entirety. so please let us use all three.
>>  
>> with oomph--howard
>>  
>> --
>> Howard Bloom
>> Howardbloom.net
>> Author of: The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of 
>> History ("mesmerizing"-The Washington Post), 
>> Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st 
>> Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New Yorker), 
>> The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism ("A tremendously 
>> enjoyable book." James Fallows, National Correspondent, The Atlantic), 
>> The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates("Bloom's argument will rock 
>> your world." Barbara Ehrenreich), 
>> How I Accidentally Started the Sixties (“Wow! Whew! Wild! Wonderful!” 
>> Timothy Leary), and 
>> The Mohammed Code (“A terrifying book…the best book I’ve read on Islam.” 
>> David Swindle, PJ Media).
>> Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate Institute; Former Visiting 
>> Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York University
>> Founder: International Paleopsychology Project. Founder: The Group Selection 
>> Squad; Founder, Space Development Steering Committee. Board Member and 
>> Member Of Board Of Governors, National Space Society. Founding Board Member: 
>> Epic of Evolution Society. Founding Board Member, The Darwin Project. 
>> Founder: The Big Bang Tango Media Lab. Member: New York Academy of Sciences, 
>> American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Psychological 
>> Society, Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, 
>> International Society for Human Ethology. Scientific Advisory Board Member, 
>> Lifeboat Foundation. Advisory Board Member, The Buffalo Film Festival. 
>> Editorial board member, The Journal of Space Philosophy. 
>>  
>> In a message dated 6/19/2015 9:22:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
>> emanl@gmail.com writes:
>>  
>> 
>> Dear Jerry,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Thank you for responding to my post.
>> 
>> Thank you very much for an attempt to read and to understand my Vienna 
>> Symposium related publications.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I apologize for a delay in my response – I was trying to read and to 
>> understand your papers (“Algebraic Biology” and “Physical Foundations of 
>> Organic Mathematics”). Unfortunately, I did not understand much of what you 
>> are talking there (about biological computations).
>> 
>> Never mind, it is my fault, not yours. To my shame, I often also do not 
>> understand what other people on the forum are writing too.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> As to me, I think (and write) that the era of a computational approach to 
>> science and nature studies is over and we are gradually replacing it with a 
>> cognitive approach. (Computational biology, Computational ecology, 
>> Computational neuroscience, Computational genomics, Computational chemistry, 
>> Computational endocrinology, Computational intelligence, Computational 
>> linguistics and so on are now being replaced with Cognitive biology, 
>> Cognitive ecology, Cognitive neuroscience, Cognitive genomics, Cognitive 
>> endocrinology, Cognitive intelligence, Cognitive linguistics, and even 
>> Cognitive computing).
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> By definition, computational approaches imply intensive data processing, 
>> while Cognitive approaches imply dedicated information processing. What i

Re: [Fis] Krassimir's Notes . . .

[Moisés André Nisenbaum]

Hi, Howard.
Answering your question "hb: i'm a newcomer to these discussions.  what is
the fourth great domain of science?" Might be useful also for who came in
the FIS list  after 2015 IS4IS Summit.
The last discussion before the conference, was "A Dialog on the
Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science". A copy of the post is in
the end of this message.
Based on a Pedros's paper and Rosenbloom's book we propose that all
scientific disciplines could be a combination of 4 great scientific
domains. We are looking for a method to verify that the informational is
the 4th great domain. Maybe Loet's Maps of Science should be a good
approach.

Cheers

Moisés

-- 
Moisés André Nisenbaum
Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc.
Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ
Campus Maracanã
moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br


*A Dialog on the Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science*
*Moisés André Nisenbaum & Ken Herold*


*PART 1:  **Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science*
(Moisés André Nisenbaum)

To classify is human (BOWKER & STAR 2000). The organization of scientific
knowledge is concern of scientists long ago. It started as a matter of
librarianship and has evolved over time using various tools like
enumerative classification, faceted classification, universal
classification, controlled vocabulary, thesaurus, ontologies, Semantic Web.
But how Information Science should organize scientific knowledge taking
into account the dynamic behavior of disciplines and multi, inter and
trans-disciplinary science of the twenty-first century (Information
Society)?

Rosenbloom (2012) proposed a model in which four great Scientific Domains -
Physical (P) Life (L), social (S) and Computing (C) - can becombined to
form any discipline
.
The first three (P, L and S) are "well known" domains and he proposes that
the 4th is Computing. The small number of domains (compared with 10 of DDC
and UDC) is offset by dynamic

 relationships

between
domains that can be written by Metascience Expression Language
.
Although the prerequisites of a Great Scientific Domain has been well
developed, Rosenbloom does not explain why they are in number of four or
why these specific four domains.

NAVARRO, MORAL and Marijuan (2013) propose that the 4th Great Scientific
Domain is the Informational (I) instead of Computing. However, the biggest
proposal is that the Information Science needs to be rethought to support
theoretically and methodologically this 4th Great Scientific Domain. At the
end of the article, the authors propose the insertion of the four Great
Scientific Domains
 in
High-Resolution Map of Sciences (Bollen at all, 2009)


The problem is that all this is still in its "philosophical field" and miss
a more pragmatic approach. When I observed this map, I just thought about
how to measure these four domains and, even without even knowing exactly
how to do this, I asked Bollen the raw data of his research. My initial
idea was to identify every scientific discipline by a mathematical entity,
for example a digital 4x4 matrix representing quantitatively the four Great
Scientific Domain components and their relationships. The problem how to
establish the criteria (bibliometric) that would define the matrix
elements. Once created, we can check if the matrices really come together
as expected.

Best,
Moisés

*References:*

BOWKER, Geoffrey C.; STAR, Susan Leigh. Sorting things out: Classification
and its consequences. MIT press, 2000.


ROSENBLOOM, Paul S. On computing: the fourth great scientific domain. MIT
Press, 2012.


NAVARRO, Jorge; MORAL, Raquel del; MARIJUÁN, Pedro C.. The uprising of
informational: towards a new way of thinking Information Science. Presented
at 1st International Conference in China on the Philosophy of Information,
Xi’an, China, 18 October 2013.


BOLLEN, Johan et al. Clickstream data yields high-resolution maps of
science. PLoS One, v. 4, n. 3, p. e4803, 2009.