Dear Loet, Joseph and All,
Let me just clarify the difference making a difference between both of you
and me.
First, to Loet;
> In other words: time is a construct of language?
The answer will be yes if the physicist accepts time when preparing an
authentic user’s manual on
(I am still in China with disrupted internet. This may have to come to the list
indirectly. In this reply, I take advantage of the amazing corpus of FIS emails
over 14 years. This is an important resource and from time to time I use it in
my work. Thank you, Pedro for sustaining this.)
Koichiro
Dear Koichiro and colleagues,
Let me try to raise some questions. I find the language sometimes difficult.
Examples might help!
Ø The underlying issue is how can we construct the flow of time from the
tenses.
In other words: time is a construct of language?
When the constant u
Dear Joseph,
> I feel that in point 3. of your note you describe a key to time but you do
> not use it!
Right. The last time, I skipped over something. The issue is how to
descriptively approach phenomenological time via the interplay between real,
physical systems without prior referen
, ..). Systemic approach allows to apply this to any kind of system
submitted to a constraint.
Best
Christophe
(let me share this with the List)
From: l...@leydesdorff.net
To: christophe.men...@hotmail.fr
Subject: RE: [Fis] replies to several
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 07:43:07 +0200
1) A “meaning
Folks,
Joseph wrote:
Two aspects of the exchange between Koichiro and Loet merit attention: 1) Loet
said that his point of replacing “why” with “what” did not seem necessary to
him. In my mind, however, when Koichiro refers to “what is communicated by
what”, he is insisting on not los
highlight the specificities of organisms and humans
in terms of systems and constraints where our understanding is sometimes
limited (“ “).
Best
Christophe
From: l...@leydesdorff.net
To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch; fis@listas.unizar.es
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 21:16:01 +0200
Subject: Re: [Fis] replies to
e of interest to some.
===
Jacob Lee
ttp://www.jacoblee.net/
- Original Message -
From: "Loet Leydesdorff"
To: "joe brenner" , fis@listas.unizar.es
Sent: Sunday, May 8, 2011 12:16:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] replies to several
D
Dear Joe:
1. If I follow Loet, I must accept that Information Theory is essentially a
mathematical theory that requires abstractions for extension to complex
contexts. But Bob says that the mathematically derived “meaning” for antibodies
is a pale representation of meaning in the human cont
Dear FIS Friends,
The complexity of our recent exchanges is a
good thing - a kind of self-referential model of the complexity of information
itself. These are some of the points that stood out for me:
1. If I follow Loet, I must accept that Information Theory is essentially
a mathematic
10 matches
Mail list logo