Re: [Fis] The Travellers

2014-10-27 Thread John Collier

Folks,

I agree with Pedro that the meaning issue is 
important. After trying to give a coherent 
account within established information theory for 
a number of years (starting with Intrinsic 
Information in 1990) I came to the conclusion 
that information theory was not enough, and 
admitted that at the Biosemiotics Gathering in 
Tartu about ten years ago. I now believe that 
semiotics is the way to go to understand meaning, 
and that information theory alone is inadequate to the task.


Of course information theory could be extended, 
but I think the correct extension is semiotics. 
As Pedro said, we have not got agreement in many 
years. I think it is time to give it up and move 
into semiotics if we want to fully understand 
information. In direct opposition to Pedro's 
appeal to the Travellers metaphor, I think that 
history has shown that semiotics is distinct from 
information theory, and that information theory 
should restrict itself to the grounds that it has 
already accomplished. Oddly, Pedro seems to be 
saying that information theory includes meaning 
in exactly the opposite way to the way that 
gypsies do not historically include Travellers. So I don't get his argument.


I believe that without an explicit theory of 
signs, we cannot hope to get a theory of meaning 
from the idea of information alone. I would not 
be upset if I were proven wrong.


My best,
John

At 02:35 PM 2014-10-23, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

Dear FIS colleagues,

Regarding the theme of physical information raised by Igor and Joseph,
the main problematic aspect of information (meaning) is missing there.
One can imagine that as two physical systems interact, each one may be
metaphorically attributed with meaning respect the changes experimented.
But it is an empty attribution that does not bring any further
interesting aspect. Conversely we see real elaboration of meaning in
the cellular structures of life, particularly in brains, and we see in
our societies how scientific, technological, and economic advancements
are bringing together more and more flows of information around (social
complexity and information completely dovetail, and that's a very
important feature). Together with physical information (information
theory, logics, symmetry, etc.) each one of those realms has something
important to tell us regarding the unifying perspective necessary to
make sense of the different approaches to information: we have to
carefully listen to all of them. Thus, at the time being, the mission of
information science --or FIS at least-- would remind The Travellers,
those people in the UK and Ireland, pretendedly gypsies, who live a
nomadic life camping from site to site...  It may look unfortunate for
the disciplinarily specialized parties, but  we cannot settle any
permanent info camp --seemingly for quite a long time.

best --Pedro

-
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 ( 6818)
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-

___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis



--
John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa
T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292   F: +27 (31) 260 3031
Http://web.ncf.ca/collier


___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis


[Fis] John C. on The Travellers. Protestantism

2014-10-27 Thread Joseph Brenner

Dear John,

Thank you for your note of October 27 which helped to bring several things 
into focus for me. First, Pedro's The Travellers can be seen as a 
questioning of all but some part of any single current approach to 
information and meaning.


Suppose I assume that all existence, including our experience of it, has 
meaning. The term information sciences refers to how we abstract from this 
ontology to be able to 'handle' it within language, but information itself 
has the complex properties of existence. The task is not so much, then, to 
use semiotics to understand or extend a limited, reduced concept of 
information, but to start with another description of the existential field 
and the nature of complex information in it.


My opposition to placing semiotics 'between' reality and information is thus 
a little like protestantism, which started out by rejecting the necessity of 
an intermediary (the Pope) between man and God. (This thesis is something 
like anti-representationalism in theories of the mind.)


Frederik Stjernfelt has just published a fascinating book /Natural 
Propositions/, on Peirce's Theory of Dicisigns (discussed in the 
Biosemiotics list). In it, he traces the evolution of Peirce's thinking 
toward greater and greater realism and mentions Peirce's critique of dogma 
as blocking inquiry. I feel we should now apply this critique to Peircean 
semiotics itself and make sure that any semiotics we use does not depend on 
an arbitrary classification of natural processes in which a linguistic 
(propositional) framework determines the applicable logic.


Finally, I refer those who question my original assumption to Floridi whose 
critical insight that all information (and therefore everything) has value 
is at the foundation of his philosophy of information. I cannot separate 
value and meaning.


Best regards,

Joseph

- Original Message - 
From: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za

To: Pedro C. Marijuan pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es; fis@listas.unizar.es
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] The Travellers


Folks,

I agree with Pedro that the meaning issue is
important. After trying to give a coherent
account within established information theory for
a number of years (starting with Intrinsic
Information in 1990) I came to the conclusion
that information theory was not enough, and
admitted that at the Biosemiotics Gathering in
Tartu about ten years ago. I now believe that
semiotics is the way to go to understand meaning,
and that information theory alone is inadequate to the task.

Of course information theory could be extended,
but I think the correct extension is semiotics.
As Pedro said, we have not got agreement in many
years. I think it is time to give it up and move
into semiotics if we want to fully understand
information. In direct opposition to Pedro's
appeal to the Travellers metaphor, I think that
history has shown that semiotics is distinct from
information theory, and that information theory
should restrict itself to the grounds that it has
already accomplished. Oddly, Pedro seems to be
saying that information theory includes meaning
in exactly the opposite way to the way that
gypsies do not historically include Travellers. So I don't get his argument.

I believe that without an explicit theory of
signs, we cannot hope to get a theory of meaning
from the idea of information alone. I would not
be upset if I were proven wrong.

My best,
John

At 02:35 PM 2014-10-23, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

Dear FIS colleagues,

Regarding the theme of physical information raised by Igor and Joseph,
the main problematic aspect of information (meaning) is missing there.
One can imagine that as two physical systems interact, each one may be
metaphorically attributed with meaning respect the changes experimented.
But it is an empty attribution that does not bring any further
interesting aspect. Conversely we see real elaboration of meaning in
the cellular structures of life, particularly in brains, and we see in
our societies how scientific, technological, and economic advancements
are bringing together more and more flows of information around (social
complexity and information completely dovetail, and that's a very
important feature). Together with physical information (information
theory, logics, symmetry, etc.) each one of those realms has something
important to tell us regarding the unifying perspective necessary to
make sense of the different approaches to information: we have to
carefully listen to all of them. Thus, at the time being, the mission of
information science --or FIS at least-- would remind The Travellers,
those people in the UK and Ireland, pretendedly gypsies, who live a
nomadic life camping from site to site...  It may look unfortunate for
the disciplinarily specialized parties, but  we cannot settle any
permanent info camp --seemingly for quite a long time.

best --Pedro

-
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo 

Re: [Fis] The Travellers

2014-10-27 Thread Francesco Rizzo
Cari tutti,
secondo me, il concetto o significato dell'informazione è l'assunzione o il
prendere forma di tutti e di tutto. Vi sono tanti tipi di informazione che
usano unità di misure diverse e talvolta contrastanti. Ad es,
l'informazione matematica si misura in bit di entropia. Nell'informazione
naturale o termodinamica l'entropia coincide con la degradazione energetica
o deformazione (dis-informazione). ma non v'è contraddizione:il significato
è sempre lo stesso, l'unità di misura è diversa. D'altra parte perché
l'informazione matematica acquisti un significato semantico è necessario un
s-codice che impoverisce l'informazione matematica e rende possibile un
significato semiotico-culturale e storico-sociale.Il valore dei beni
(economici) è funzione della loro informazione.La moneta è il segno del
valore (Marx). La forma del valore o il valore della forma è fondamentale
e fondante. La triade semiotica è costituita da: significazione,
informazione e comunicazione di cui si avvalgano l'esistenza e la
conoscenza in generale.
So di procurarvi qualche fastidio linguistico che potete evitare facendo
finta di non  avere ricevuto alcun messaggio.
Intanto, grazie e un abbraccio per tutti.
 Francesco Rizzo.

2014-10-27 7:12 GMT+01:00 John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za:

 Folks,

 I agree with Pedro that the meaning issue is important. After trying to
 give a coherent account within established information theory for a number
 of years (starting with Intrinsic Information in 1990) I came to the
 conclusion that information theory was not enough, and admitted that at the
 Biosemiotics Gathering in Tartu about ten years ago. I now believe that
 semiotics is the way to go to understand meaning, and that information
 theory alone is inadequate to the task.

 Of course information theory could be extended, but I think the correct
 extension is semiotics. As Pedro said, we have not got agreement in many
 years. I think it is time to give it up and move into semiotics if we want
 to fully understand information. In direct opposition to Pedro's appeal to
 the Travellers metaphor, I think that history has shown that semiotics is
 distinct from information theory, and that information theory should
 restrict itself to the grounds that it has already accomplished. Oddly,
 Pedro seems to be saying that information theory includes meaning in
 exactly the opposite way to the way that gypsies do not historically
 include Travellers. So I don't get his argument.

 I believe that without an explicit theory of signs, we cannot hope to get
 a theory of meaning from the idea of information alone. I would not be
 upset if I were proven wrong.

 My best,
 John


 At 02:35 PM 2014-10-23, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

 Dear FIS colleagues,

 Regarding the theme of physical information raised by Igor and Joseph,
 the main problematic aspect of information (meaning) is missing there.
 One can imagine that as two physical systems interact, each one may be
 metaphorically attributed with meaning respect the changes experimented.
 But it is an empty attribution that does not bring any further
 interesting aspect. Conversely we see real elaboration of meaning in
 the cellular structures of life, particularly in brains, and we see in
 our societies how scientific, technological, and economic advancements
 are bringing together more and more flows of information around (social
 complexity and information completely dovetail, and that's a very
 important feature). Together with physical information (information
 theory, logics, symmetry, etc.) each one of those realms has something
 important to tell us regarding the unifying perspective necessary to
 make sense of the different approaches to information: we have to
 carefully listen to all of them. Thus, at the time being, the mission of
 information science --or FIS at least-- would remind The Travellers,
 those people in the UK and Ireland, pretendedly gypsies, who live a
 nomadic life camping from site to site...  It may look unfortunate for
 the disciplinarily specialized parties, but  we cannot settle any
 permanent info camp --seemingly for quite a long time.

 best --Pedro

 -
 Pedro C. Marijuán
 Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
 Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
 Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
 Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
 Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 ( 6818)
 pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
 http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
 -

 ___
 Fis mailing list
 Fis@listas.unizar.es
 http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis



 --
 John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa
 T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292   F: +27 (31) 260 3031
 Http://web.ncf.ca/collier