Dear Loet and colleagues,
I wonder if an alternative view is possible: that the symbolic
codification of the sciences inherent in discourse and supported by
our universities (as they are currently constituted) is a constraint
which prevents us exploring a proper science of constraint. To
overcome
Loet wrote:
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"
{reduction of possibilities {interpretation
-Original Message-
From: Robert E. Ulanowicz [mailto:u...@umces.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 7:11 PM
To: Mark Johnson; Loet Leydesdorff
Cc: Robert Ulanowicz
Subject: Re: [Fis] [Fwd: Re: Information is a linguistic description of
structures]--T...
Dear Mark & Loet,
in other words, it's time we confess in science just how little we know
about language, that we explore language's mysteries, and that we use our
discoveries as a crowbar to pry open the secrets of this highly contextual,
deeply relational, profoundly communicational cosmos.
Dear colleagues,
Dear Howard:
I am afraid one of your examples is not really accurate historically:
"the most amazing metaphor of relationality available to us is not math,
it's not mechanism, and it's not reduction to "elements," it's
language. by using the metaphor of a form of language called "code,"
Cari Tutti,
condivido al 100% quel che afferma Marcin che si ritrova scritto in circa
20 miei libri. Quando parlo di significazione, informazione e comunicazione
mi riferisco all'intera esistenza e a tutta la conoscenza in-centrate su
quattro (ma potrebbero essere 44) tipi di informazione:
Howard:
I applaud your critique of our legacy attempts to render life meaningful
in terms of what you call "necrophilia" and Hans Jonas has called an
"ontology of death".
In my last book, "A Third Window", I attempted to develop the metaphysics
of a process ecology of relationships as an
bob,
thanks for an extraordinary answer. riddled with extraordinary knowledge.
I've just bought your book from Amazon and it should be in my kindle
momentarily. if you'd like a copy of mine--The God Problem: How a Godless
Cosmos Creates--i can email it to you. and to anyone else on
re: it is likely to be problematic to use language as the paradigm model
for all communication--Terrence Deacon
Terry makes interesting points, but I think on this one, he may be wrong.
Guenther Witzany is on to something. our previous approaches to
information have been what Barbara
