[Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Marcus Abundis 
Hey Mark,
Sorry if I confused things by commenting on Bateson AND THEN
Shannon-Weaver. In my mind those were two different matters, and did not
merit my calling them out as such.

In general . . .
I too never saw Shanon-Weaver's Levels A, B, C as complete. In fact, I
thought that portrayal as barely (oddly) half-hearted, in contrast to the
allusion to a needed "theory of meaning." Still, I will dig into the work
Loet and Bob reference . . . and see if I can find some personal
satisfaction.

ALSO, I found myself wondering if I should somehow try to tie Steven's
sense of locality in with the notion of Levels A, B, C. Perhaps they are
not specific enough in order to do so – not sure.

[image: --]
Marcus Abundis
[image: http://]about.me/marcus.abundis

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

Re: [Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Mark Johnson 
Maybe I've missed something, but the subsumption I mentioned
(referring to Bateson) was not between A, B and C: these are
co-existent interacting dynamics as I understand them, and certainly a
very rigorous and powerful generative model.

I was worrying about subsumption of Bateson's "imagination" into
"rigour" Loet's model does have 'imagination' in it in the
generation of redundancies. But does it include the human imagination
capable of conceiving a model of itself?

I wonder if a possible answer to the question lies in Loet's work.
Human embodiment is a constraint which an abstract rigorous model can
never have. Within dynamics of mutual redundancy, won't the
complexities of mutual redundancies of embodied existence will always
outweigh the mutual redundancies that can be abstractly modelled?

best wishes,

Mark


On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Robert E. Ulanowicz  wrote:
>
>> On 2015-10-14, at 12:38 PM, Marcus Abundis wrote:
>>
>>> RE Mark Johnson's post of Thu Oct 1 09:47:13 on Bateson and imagination
> Two quick remarks:
>
> 1. It's not at all clear to me that C is subsumptive of B.
>
> 2. I would lobby for Shannon/Bayesian relationships as an intermediary
> between A. and B (i.e., preliminary to "meaning").
>
> Cheers to all,
> Bob U.
>
>>> . . .
>>>  – Me Too!
>>>
>>> RE Loet & Stan's postings beginning Thu Oct 1 21:19:50 . . .
>>> >  I suggest to distinguish between three levels (following Weaver): <
>>> > A. (Shannon-type) information processing ; <
>>> > B. meaning sharing using languages;<
>>> > C. translations among coded communications.<
>>> > So, here we have a subsumptive hierarchy"<
>>>
>>> I was wondering if this note means to imply an *all inclusive* list of
>>> traits to be considered in modeling information? Or, alternatively . . .
>>> what would such an all inclusive list look like?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Marcus Abundis
>>> about.me/marcus.abundis
>
>
> ___
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

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

Re: [Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Robert E. Ulanowicz 

> On 2015-10-14, at 12:38 PM, Marcus Abundis wrote:
>
>> RE Mark Johnson's post of Thu Oct 1 09:47:13 on Bateson and imagination
Two quick remarks:

1. It's not at all clear to me that C is subsumptive of B.

2. I would lobby for Shannon/Bayesian relationships as an intermediary
between A. and B (i.e., preliminary to "meaning").

Cheers to all,
Bob U.

>> . . .
>>  – Me Too!
>>
>> RE Loet & Stan's postings beginning Thu Oct 1 21:19:50 . . .
>> >  I suggest to distinguish between three levels (following Weaver): <
>> > A. (Shannon-type) information processing ; <
>> > B. meaning sharing using languages;<
>> > C. translations among coded communications.<
>> > So, here we have a subsumptive hierarchy"<
>>
>> I was wondering if this note means to imply an *all inclusive* list of
>> traits to be considered in modeling information? Or, alternatively . . .
>> what would such an all inclusive list look like?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcus Abundis
>> about.me/marcus.abundis


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

Re: [Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Bob Logan 
The list is far from complete - organization is a form of information so is DNA 
see Kauffman, Logan et al. Propagation of Organization: An Enquiry at 
www.academia.edu/783503/Propagating_organization_an_enquiry  

Regards to all my FIS friends - Bob


__

Robert K. Logan
Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto 
Fellow University of St. Michael's College
Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD
http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan
www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan
www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications



On 2015-10-14, at 12:38 PM, Marcus Abundis wrote:

> RE Mark Johnson's post of Thu Oct 1 09:47:13 on Bateson and imagination . . .
>  – Me Too!
> 
> RE Loet & Stan's postings beginning Thu Oct 1 21:19:50 . . . 
> >  I suggest to distinguish between three levels (following Weaver): <
> > A. (Shannon-type) information processing ; <
> > B. meaning sharing using languages;<
> > C. translations among coded communications.<
> > So, here we have a subsumptive hierarchy"<
> 
> I was wondering if this note means to imply an *all inclusive* list of traits 
> to be considered in modeling information? Or, alternatively . . . what would 
> such an all inclusive list look like?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>  
> 
> Marcus Abundis
> about.me/marcus.abundis
> 
>   
> 
> ___
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

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

Re: [Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Loet Leydesdorff 
Dear Marcus,

 

Yes, that is the idea!

 


The Self-Organization of Meaning and the Reflexive Communication of Information 
 


Loet Leydesdorff, Alexander Petersen, and Inga A. Ivanova

 


Following a suggestion of Warren Weaver, we extend the Shannon model of 
communication piecemeal into a complex systems model in which communication is 
differentiated both vertically and horizontally. This model enables us to 
bridge the divide between Niklas Luhmann's theory of the self-organization of 
meaning in communications and empirical research using information theory. 
First, we distinguish between communication relations and correlations between 
patterns of relations. The correlations span a vector space in which relations 
are positioned and thus provided with meaning. Second, positions provide 
reflexive perspectives. Whereas the different meanings are integrated locally, 
each instantiation opens horizons of meaning that can be codified along 
eigenvectors of the communication matrix. The next-order specification of 
codified meaning can generate redundancies (as feedback on the forward arrow of 
entropy production). The horizontal differentiation among the codes of 
communication enables us to quantify the creation of new options as mutual 
redundancy. Increases in redundancy can then be measured as local reduction of 
prevailing uncertainty (in bits). The generation of options can also be 
considered as a hallmark of the knowledge-based economy: new knowledge provides 
new options. Both the communication-theoretical and the operational 
(information-theoretical) perspectives can thus be further developed. 

 

Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05251 

 

 

Best,

Loet

 

 

 

  _  

Loet Leydesdorff 

Professor Emeritus, University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)

  l...@leydesdorff.net ;  
 http://www.leydesdorff.net/ 
Honorary Professor,   SPRU, University of 
Sussex; 

Guest Professor   Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 
Visiting Professor,   ISTIC, Beijing;

Visiting Professor,   Birkbeck, University of London; 

  
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ&hl=en

 

From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Marcus Abundis
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 6:38 PM
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: [Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

 

RE Mark Johnson's post of Thu Oct 1 09:47:13 on Bateson and imagination . . .

 – Me Too!

 

RE Loet & Stan's postings beginning Thu Oct 1 21:19:50 . . . 

>  I suggest to distinguish between three levels (following Weaver): <

> A. (Shannon-type) information processing ; <

> B. meaning sharing using languages;<

> C. translations among coded communications.<

> So, here we have a subsumptive hierarchy"<

 

I was wondering if this note means to imply an *all inclusive* list of traits 
to be considered in modeling information? Or, alternatively . . . what would 
such an all inclusive list look like?

 

Thanks!

 


 



Marcus Abundis

about.me/marcus.abundis


   

  



 

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

[Fis] Shannon-Weavers' Levels A, B, C.

2015-10-14 Thread Marcus Abundis 
RE Mark Johnson's post of Thu Oct 1 09:47:13 on Bateson and imagination . .
.
 – Me Too!

RE Loet & Stan's postings beginning Thu Oct 1 21:19:50 . . .
>  I suggest to distinguish between three levels (following Weaver): <
> A. (Shannon-type) information processing ; <
> B. meaning sharing using languages;<
> C. translations among coded communications.<
> So, here we have a subsumptive hierarchy"<

I was wondering if this note means to imply an *all inclusive* list of
traits to be considered in modeling information? Or, alternatively . . .
what would such an all inclusive list look like?

Thanks!


[image: --]
Marcus Abundis
[image: http://]about.me/marcus.abundis

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