Dear all,
As the notion of information is again (and interestingly) put on the forefront,
let’s not forget the evolutionary approach that naturally introduces the notion
of meaning and allows to bring in a system oriented perspective.
Assuming we put aside the reason of being of the universe, th
Dear Christophe,
I like your approach. Here is something even simpler: the system is the meaning
of the information. System and meaning are not totally separable. One's
perspective focuses on one or the other, as the case may be.
Best wishes,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: Chri
Dear Christophe and all
I am sorry not to have had the time to anticipate in this discussion, but now
that Christophe bring up my favorite problem: the relation between information
and meaning I feel I must say something. This comment goes to those who also
have ontological reflections on infor
Yes Joseph, you are right.
As the satisfaction of the constraint is mandatory for the system to maintain
its nature, system and constraint are indeed tightly linked.
The “stay alive” constraint came up on earth with the first organisms that had
to maintain a local far from equilibrium status. T
Dear Christophe
May I point out then that meaning of information is not information, but
meaning and therefore not comprehensible in information theory or science?
Venlig hilsen/best wishes
Søren Brier
Professor of semiotics at Department of International Studies of Culture and
Communication, C
Again, I would like to point out that "a local far from equilibrium status" is
not enough to define life. It only defines a chemical aspect of living system
as well as many other non-living systems. Our problem is that something about
life evades our present scientific attempts to find a scienti
Commenting upon Christophe's:
C: Assuming we put aside the reason of being of the universe, there is no
entity
to care about information before the coming up of life on earth.
-snip-: C: I feel that the meaning of information (whatever it’s naming) exists
because there is a system that needs t
Hi folks, it's a long time since I contributed, but now I have something new to say (new to me, anyway!).
To me this issue is very simple: the meaning of information to a receiving system is the effect on the system of the reception of the information.
This makes meaning relative, but I belie
Dear Stan
In general I can accept the drift of most of your answers, but I think you
overlook one important process in the living systems, they experience the
universe and the more they develop the more refined their experience becomes.
Then they start to talk about them, later to write tem dow
I am a little troubled by this account of the term "meaning." As
described the distinction is not necessary and the concept of
"constraint" seems arbitrary. How are we to identify these
constraints? What is the measure of meaning?
As I understand it Christophe proposes that the measure of
Robin,
You described very nicely the most fundamental way I like to think of semantics
(the meaning of information; I hope I am using this term properly). I would
emphasize that for me the "effect on the system" is a strictly internal
cascade. For example, if I perceive new information as rev
Giddens' "structuration," Luhmann's "self-organization,"
and the operationalization of the dynamics of meaning
Abstract:
Luhmann's social systems theory and Giddens' structuration theory of action
share an emphasis on reflexivity, but focus on meaning along a divide
between inter-human communica
12 matches
Mail list logo
