Re: [Fis] Ostension and the Chemical / Molecular Biological Science. FROM STAN

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Message from STAN


Jerry -- It is this translation from material observations into logical 
form, in particular into fully explicit, crisp logical form that I am 
questioning.  Yes, it can lead to short term triumphs, via engineering, 
but I think that our culture has boxed itself into a conceptual corner 
by total reliance on focus on particulars (e.g., 'information') and 
their manipulation into (short term) success and profit.  The 
supposition that the information concept can form the basis of a 
conceptual understanding of the world is a consequence of our valuing 
these successes excessively.


STAN
---

Jerry (your other message)

You seem to think that the World has a logical foundation, as judged by 
"spectacular  practical and economic success.


Since this 'success' appears to be leading toward our doom, I have 
reservations about it.  As well, I think that there is no objective 
evidence that the world apart from us, is logical.


STAN
--

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan 
mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>> wrote:


   Message From Jerry Chandler

   (Please post to FIS) 



   List, Stan:

   Are you serious about taking up scientific ostension?  


   A. Lavoisier was the first to apply a systematic theory of
   information to ostensive but invisible and indivisible relations
   within materially causal systems.

   John Dalton was the first to apply a systematic mathematical theory
   of information to the invisible and indivisible relations within
   materially causal systems. 


   Both Lavoisier and Dalton were motivated by the earlier decisive
   experimentation of J. Priestley showing the ostensive material
   causal relations  relating plant to animal life.

   (I am using the term "information" in the sense of non-predicative
   objects (concepts) bringing form into a system; this usage is not
   restricted to Keilmeyer's notion of organic forces.)

   With regard to the role of information theory in the relations
   between traditional inquiry and technology, one has to look no
   further than the International System of Units (de Tracy) which
   imagined relations between mathematical functions and the measurable
   properties of nature.  Although the SI was purposed for economic
   purposes of "fair trade", it has become the de facto basis of
   logical relations of physics and engineering.

   No ostension between the Lavoisier/Dalton theory of information and
   the SI system is possible.  


   Cheers

   Jerry

 


   *From: *Stanley N Salthe mailto:ssal...@binghamton.edu>>
   *Date: *January 19, 2011 9:35:51 AM EST
   *To: *fis@listas.unizar.es 
   *Subject: **Re: [Fis] Future discussions*


   Tagging on after Joseph --

   On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:19 PM, joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
    mailto:joe.bren...@bluewin.ch>> wrote:

   Dear Pedro and All,

   Thank you for your note and the ambitious program. My brief
   comments by theme:

 --Theme 1: Historical Foundations of Modern Science. 


   Sounds very interesting; the "Science and Society" aspect
   fits well with Theme 3.

   I hope it will discuss how science was taken over as (became limited
   to) support for technology. 




   -- Theme 2: On Information Theory. 


   My hope is that this discussion will have a good deal to do
   with qualitative as well as quantitative aspects of
   information. Perhaps people should state clearly what the
   primary interests and objectives are of their remarks.


   Maybe it could take up ostension?  This would bring in vagueness (or
   at least fuzzy information theory)? 




   -- Theme 3: Foundations of Social Information Science.

   This should be a fascinating occasion to evaluate different
   social models from an informational standpoint.

   Again, ostensible communication. Pointed absence of communication?

   STAN 


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


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

[Fis] Ostension and the Chemical / Molecular Biological Science

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Message From Jerry Chandler
---

(Please post to FIS) 



List, Stan:

Are you serious about taking up scientific ostension?  

A. Lavoisier was the first to apply a systematic theory of information 
to ostensive but invisible and indivisible relations within materially 
causal systems.


John Dalton was the first to apply a systematic mathematical theory of 
information to the invisible and indivisible relations within materially 
causal systems. 

Both Lavoisier and Dalton were motivated by the earlier decisive 
experimentation of J. Priestley showing the ostensive material causal 
relations  relating plant to animal life.


(I am using the term "information" in the sense of non-predicative 
objects (concepts) bringing form into a system; this usage is not 
restricted to Keilmeyer's notion of organic forces.)


With regard to the role of information theory in the relations between 
traditional inquiry and technology, one has to look no further than the 
International System of Units (de Tracy) which imagined relations 
between mathematical functions and the measurable properties of nature. 
Although the SI was purposed for economic purposes of "fair trade", it 
has become the de facto basis of logical relations of physics and 
engineering.


No ostension between the Lavoisier/Dalton theory of information and the 
SI system is possible.  


Cheers

Jerry

 

*From: *Stanley N Salthe >

*Date: *January 19, 2011 9:35:51 AM EST
*To: *fis@listas.unizar.es 
*Subject: **Re: [Fis] Future discussions*


Tagging on after Joseph --

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:19 PM, joe.bren...@bluewin.ch 
 > wrote:


   Dear Pedro and All,

   Thank you for your note and the ambitious program. My brief comments
   by theme:

 --Theme 1: Historical Foundations of Modern Science. 


   Sounds very interesting; the "Science and Society" aspect fits
   well with Theme 3.

I hope it will discuss how science was taken over as (became limited to) 
support for technology. 




   -- Theme 2: On Information Theory. 


   My hope is that this discussion will have a good deal to do with
   qualitative as well as quantitative aspects of information.
   Perhaps people should state clearly what the primary interests
   and objectives are of their remarks.


Maybe it could take up ostension?  This would bring in vagueness (or at 
least fuzzy information theory)? 




   -- Theme 3: Foundations of Social Information Science.

   This should be a fascinating occasion to evaluate different
   social models from an informational standpoint.

Again, ostensible communication. Pointed absence of communication?

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