Re: [Fis] FW: Denumerability of information (II)

2009-04-02 Thread Rafael Capurro
Christophe
I completely agree you. Interpretation is the key issue when talking 
i.e. interpreting... information. The concept of agent should be 
carefully analyzed. Then pragmatics (and not only Syntax and Semantics) 
becomes also a key issue, particularly in case of living agents when the 
outcomes are not deterministic.
Rafael

 Dear all,
 Comments from Michel and Rafael bring up an aspect of the proposal 
 that has perhaps been underestimated. It is the interpretation of 
 information which generates its content, its meaning. From 
 “Information in cells” to “information for cells” we precisely have 
 the interpretating function where an agent creates meaning for its own 
 usage. Different agents generate different meanings. And information 
 in antennas is not for antennas as they contain no interpretating 
 function.
 Can the paragraph “Semantics” cover this point? Perhaps, but I’m not 
 sure that semantics for bioinformation is currently used. 
 The concept of interpretation looks to me as key when talking about 
 information in agents. If the proposal takes it into account from a 
 different perspective, perhaps it would be worth expliciting it.
 Best regards

 Christophe

  

  Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:57:53 +0200
  From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
  To: fis@listas.unizar.es
  Subject: [Fis] Denumerability of information (II)
 
 
  (message II, responses from Díaz Nafría and Rafael Capurro)
 
  --
 
  Dear Michel:
 
  Thank you for your good remarks. I agree about both. Of course, data
  banks may be considered in the list. In any case, that list should be
  too long if it were exhaustive. That is to say, “…” concern to a much
  larger list that the enunciated one (and considering length I may say
  that there were only 1 character left to fulfil the “text of
  proposal” and we use them all). Anyway, data banks are certainly a
  relevant case so they will be mentioned in next submissions.
 
  About (2), I remember the controversy which arose from a question you
  stated in December –I think-. I also keep in mind the interesting
  answer from Rafael. I wrote him some remarks about the controversy. I
  will try to find them to give you my point of view about that
  interesting question.
 
  Grateful and cordial greetings,
 
  José María Díaz Nafría
 
  -
 
  Dear Michel and all,
 
  yes, the formulation there is information in cells... could be
  misleading as it means, IMO, there is information for cells or
  messages that cells are able to process as information, i.e., through
  a process of selection and integration in them according to their
  specific way of life. What is stored in data banks is in fact not
  information but potential information for a system capable of
  understanding or processing it. The question of numerability is one
  possible framework of interpretation which means particularly since
  modern science, that we think we understand something as far as we 
 are
  able to interpret it as countable using particularly digital media. In
  the 19th century this framework was mainly related to matter (what is
  not material is not understandable). Of course different 
 frameworks or
  (metaphysical) paradigms compete with each other unless they are
  viewed as the only true ones... And: they have consequences for
  society, politics etc. as we can see everyday
 
  kind regards
 
  Rafael
  
  ___
  fis mailing list
  fis@listas.unizar.es
  https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

 
 Votre correspondant a choisi Hotmail et profite d’un stockage 
 quasiment illimité. Créez un compte Hotmail gratuitement ! 
 http://www.windowslive.fr/hotmail/default.asp
 

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


-- 
Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
Hochschule der Medien (HdM), Germany
Steinbeis Hochschule Berlin (SHB), Germany
Postal Address: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
E-Mail: raf...@capurro.de
Voice: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
Homepage: www.capurro.de
STI-IE: http://sti-ie.de
ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
Information Ethics Senior Fellow, 2009-2010, Center for Information Policy 
Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee, USA

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


[Fis] FW: Denumerability of information (II)

2009-03-31 Thread Christophe Menant

Dear all, 
Comments from Michel and Rafael bring up an aspect of the proposal that has 
perhaps been underestimated. It is the interpretation of information which 
generates its content, its meaning. From “Information in cells” to “information 
for cells” we precisely have the interpretating function where an agent creates 
meaning for its own usage. Different agents generate different meanings. And 
information in antennas is not for antennas as they contain no interpretating 
function. 
Can the paragraph “Semantics” cover this point? Perhaps, but I’m not sure that 
semantics for bioinformation is currently used. 
The concept of interpretation looks to me as key when talking about information 
in agents. If the proposal takes it into account from a different perspective, 
perhaps it would be worth expliciting it.
Best regards
Christophe

 
 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:57:53 +0200
 From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
 To: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: [Fis] Denumerability of information (II)
 
 
 (message II, responses from Díaz Nafría and Rafael Capurro)
 
 --
 
 Dear Michel:
 
 Thank you for your good remarks. I agree about both. Of course, data
 banks may be considered in the list. In any case, that list should be
 too long if it were exhaustive. That is to say, “…” concern to a much
 larger list that the enunciated one (and considering length I may say
 that there were only 1 character left to fulfil the “text of
 proposal” and we use them all). Anyway, data banks are certainly a
 relevant case so they will be mentioned in next submissions.
 
 About (2), I remember the controversy which arose from a question you
 stated in December –I think-. I also keep in mind the interesting
 answer from Rafael. I wrote him some remarks about the controversy. I
 will try to find them to give you my point of view about that
 interesting question.
 
 Grateful and cordial greetings,
 
 José María Díaz Nafría
 
 -
 
 Dear Michel and all,
 
 yes, the formulation there is information in cells... could be 
 misleading as it means, IMO, there is information for cells or 
 messages that cells are able to process as information, i.e., through 
 a process of selection and integration in them according to their 
 specific way of life. What is stored in data banks is in fact not 
 information but potential information for a system capable of 
 understanding or processing it. The question of numerability is one 
 possible framework of interpretation which means particularly since 
 modern science, that we think we understand something as far as we are 
 able to interpret it as countable using particularly digital media. In 
 the 19th century this framework was mainly related to matter (what is 
 not material is not understandable). Of course different frameworks or 
 (metaphysical) paradigms compete with each other unless they are 
 viewed as the only true ones... And: they have consequences for 
 society, politics etc. as we can see everyday
 
 kind regards
 
 Rafael
 
 ___
 fis mailing list
 fis@listas.unizar.es
 https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

_
Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger  !  
Téléchargez-le maintenant !
http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis