In order: John, I agree. For example, if one identifies information with constraint, the notion of information as causation becomes tautologous. It also feeds into the notion of "It from bit"! Terry, I agree, best to remain as catholic as possible in our conception of the notion. Otto:
I wrote a paper some time ago arguing that causal processes are the transfer of information. Therefore I think that physical processes can and do convey information. Cause can be dispensed with. * There is a copy at Causation is the Transfer of
Dear FIS colleagues, As usual, I would like to begin with apologies. I apologize that because of the gaps in my education I can only partially understand what is being said in most of your mails. Therefore, I will only partially respond to those segments of your posts that seem to me to be in
Dear FIS-ers, 1) A can is empty or filled. Its "emptiness" or "filledness" is an information. This is an objective property. It is independent of whether a conscious being perceives it or not. I generally argue for this non-subjectivity of information. 2) There is an information change when
John Collier Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: John Collier Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017 9:39 AM To: 'darvasg'
Subject: RE: [Fis] non-living objects COULD NOT “exchange information” I wrote