Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-12 Thread Bruno Marchal

On 11 Feb 2013, at 18:38, John Collier wrote:

 I guess I am at a loss to see them as separate
 discourses.


Me too. Actually I do not believe in something like *Science*. But I  
do believe in the human *scientific attitude*, and I have eventually  
realized that such attitude is totally domain independent.

The scientific attitude is mainly a form of modesty, of  
acknowledgement that *all* theories are hypotheses, of making the  
statements as clear as possible, with the hope of seeing them refuted,  
etc.

It is frequent that a scientist will have that attitude in his  
expertise field, but will  lack all sense of it when speaking in  
another field.

When I was young academical philosophy was marxism propaganda, in  
part, and by being labeled and categorized as literature, many  
philosophers indulge in the idolatry, and argument per authority.

All the same for my favorite subject theology, which today is put in  
opposition to rationalism, which of course leads to the perpetuation  
of irrationalism in theology, and this since about the closure of  
Plato academy. But that opposition does not just prevent the  
scientific attitude in theology, it makes some good science, like  
physics, into bad pseudo-theology, very often.

I don't believe in Science, I believe in persons, and some persons can  
be serious or not in *any* domain.

Science is never an answer per se, but a tool to attempt to put some  
light on the unknown.

To oppose science, philosophy and theology leads to pseudo-theologies,  
pseudo-philosophies and pseudo-sciences.
Of course, people have fears, and the pseudo-things can exploit the  
wishful thinking related to them to do more money than the modest  
attempt to get some genuine light and some genuine progresses in the  
*search*.

In occident, I think that science has begun in -500 and ended in +500,  
when Plato Academy has been closed, and when all rationalist in the  
most fundamental questions have been either ignored, exiled, banished,  
or burned alive.

The enlightening period was only partial, as we got most of all greek  
sciences, except theology, where humans still tolerate the dogmas, the  
fairy tales and the authoritative argument, instead of modesty, doubts  
and dialogs.

Bruno



 Especially in the domain of Information.

 Contrary to what Stan said, I think that many of
 the major advances in science from Statistical
 Mechanics, to Relativity Theory to Quantum
 Mechanics did and continue to have a major
 philosophical component, and professional
 philosophers work with scientists directly in
 each of these fields, It used to be true in
 Computer Science, but is less so now. In
 Cognitive Science there is currently virtually
 now separation. In Biology there are many
 philosophers who work with biologists, and vice
 versa, but far too many who do not.

 I think that technology is much more linked to
 industry than it is to the sciences above.

 John

 At 06:03 PM 2013/02/11, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:
 How does one measure the synergy among three discourses?
 That is an interesting question within information theory (as part  
 of both
 science and philosophy).

 Best,
 Loet


 -Original Message-
 From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es 
 ] On
 Behalf Of Pedro C. Marijuan
 Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:29 PM
 To: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An  
 Alternative
 Relation] S.Brier

  Original Message 
 Subject:SV: [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An
 Alternative
 Relation
 Date:   Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:32:04 +0100
 From:   Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk
 To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch joe.bren...@bluewin.ch, Pedro  
 Clemente
 Marijuan Fernandez pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es
 fis@listas.unizar.es, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 References: 6043399.89641360255002322.javamail.webm...@bluewin.ch 
 



 Dear Joseph



 I go for each of the three nominally independent disciplines are not
 independent, but that each provides a dynamic ontological and
 epistemological link to the other two, more or less strong or  
 actual
 depending on the extent to which one wishes to emphasize certain  
 aspects
 of knowledge. Science without philosophy is stupid but philosophy
 without science is blind. I am for a synergetic interaction.





 Best wishes



  Søren Brier



 Professor in the semiotics of information, cognition and  
 commmunication
 science,

 department of International Business Communication, Copenhagen  
 Business
 School,

 Dalgas Have 15, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark,









 *Fra:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
 [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] *På vegne af *joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
 *Sendt:* 7. februar 2013 17:37
 *Til:* Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez; fis@listas.unizar.es;  
 John Collier
 *Emne:* [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative  
 

Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-11 Thread Stanley N Salthe
Søren -- Your science without philosophy is what we have mostly been
having since the industrial revolution.  In this period sciences has mostly
been the handmaid of engineering and technology, following Francis Bacon's
recommendation.  Now that our culture has captured and partly destroyed
much of the world, it is time to regain a philosophical grip on the
'sorcerer's apprentice'! One tool for this is to reinstate final cause and
Aristotle's four causes analysis.

STAN

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan 
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es wrote:

  Original Message 
 Subject:SV: [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An
 Alternative
 Relation
 Date:   Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:32:04 +0100
 From:   Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk
 To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch joe.bren...@bluewin.ch, Pedro Clemente
 Marijuan Fernandez pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es
 fis@listas.unizar.es, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 References: 6043399.89641360255002322.javamail.webm...@bluewin.ch



 Dear Joseph



 I go for each of the three nominally independent disciplines are not
 independent, but that each provides a dynamic ontological and
 epistemological link to the other two, more or less strong or actual
 depending on the extent to which one wishes to emphasize certain aspects
 of knowledge. Science without philosophy is stupid but philosophy
 without science is blind. I am for a synergetic interaction.





 Best wishes



   Søren Brier



 Professor in the semiotics of information, cognition and commmunication
 science,

 department of International Business Communication, Copenhagen Business
 School,

 Dalgas Have 15, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark,









 *Fra:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
 [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] *På vegne af *joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
 *Sendt:* 7. februar 2013 17:37
 *Til:* Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez; fis@listas.unizar.es; John
 Collier
 *Emne:* [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation



 Dear FIS Colleagues,

 The formation of the the Society for the Philosophy of Information at
 the University of Hertfordshire is announced in the link in John's note.
 It includes the announcement and Call for Papers of the International
 Conference on the Philosophy of Information to be held in Xi'An, China
 in October, 2013, sponsored by both the above Society, led by Professor
 Luciano Floridi and the Institute for the Philosophy of Information in
 Xi'An under the direction of Professor Wu Kun.

 This increased activity in the area of the philosophy of information
 (another major Workshop is planned this Spring) raises the issue of the
 relation between the science and philosophy of information as well as of
 the philosophy of science. I am aware of and agree with the position
 expressed by Pedro that information science in the FIS framework should
 emphasize scientific research in the sense of knowledge that is
 quantifiable and/or provable. However, I do not believe that either he
 or others of you intend to exclude rigorous qualitative knowledge,
 especially as it concerns the dual nature of information.

 The ubiquitous presence of information in all disciplines, as emphasized
 by Wu, suggests an alternative relation linking philosophy, science and
 information that is NOT one of simple hierarchical inclusion or
 possession (of). One possibility is to say that it is information that
 links philosophy and science, but this formulation perhaps fails to
 recognize the general properties of the latter two.

 Another possibility is to say that each of the three nominally
 independent disciplines are not independent, but that each provides a
 dynamic ontological and epistemological link to the other two, more or
 less strong or actual depending on the extent to which one wishes to
 emphasize certain aspects of knowledge.

 I look forward to your comments regarding the pros and cons of such a
 conception. Thank you.

 Best wishes,

 Joseph

 Ursprüngliche Nachricht
 Von: colli...@ukzn.ac.za mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 Datum: 04.02.2013 18:57
 An: fisfis@listas.unizar.es mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es
 Betreff: [Fis] Society for the Philosophy of Information

 http://www.socphilinfo.org/


 --
 Professor John Collier
 colli...@ukzn.ac.za mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 Philosophy and Ethics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South
 Africa
 T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292   F: +27 (31) 260 3031
 http://web.ncf.ca/collierhttp://web.ncfhttp://web.ncf.ca/collier
 .ca/collier
 http://web.ncf%3chttp:/web.ncf.ca/collier%3e.ca/collier

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




 --
 -
 Pedro C. Marijuán
 Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
 Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la 

Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-11 Thread Loet Leydesdorff
How does one measure the synergy among three discourses? 
That is an interesting question within information theory (as part of both
science and philosophy).

Best,
Loet


-Original Message-
From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On
Behalf Of Pedro C. Marijuan
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:29 PM
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative
Relation] S.Brier

 Original Message 
Subject:SV: [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An
Alternative 
Relation
Date:   Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:32:04 +0100
From:   Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk
To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch joe.bren...@bluewin.ch, Pedro Clemente 
Marijuan Fernandez pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es
fis@listas.unizar.es, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
References: 6043399.89641360255002322.javamail.webm...@bluewin.ch



Dear Joseph

 

I go for each of the three nominally independent disciplines are not 
independent, but that each provides a dynamic ontological and 
epistemological link to the other two, more or less strong or actual 
depending on the extent to which one wishes to emphasize certain aspects 
of knowledge. Science without philosophy is stupid but philosophy 
without science is blind. I am for a synergetic interaction.

 

 

Best wishes

 

  Søren Brier

 

Professor in the semiotics of information, cognition and commmunication 
science,

department of International Business Communication, Copenhagen Business 
School,

Dalgas Have 15, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark,

 

 

 

 

*Fra:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es 
[mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] *På vegne af *joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
*Sendt:* 7. februar 2013 17:37
*Til:* Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez; fis@listas.unizar.es; John Collier
*Emne:* [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation

 

Dear FIS Colleagues,

The formation of the the Society for the Philosophy of Information at 
the University of Hertfordshire is announced in the link in John's note. 
It includes the announcement and Call for Papers of the International 
Conference on the Philosophy of Information to be held in Xi'An, China 
in October, 2013, sponsored by both the above Society, led by Professor 
Luciano Floridi and the Institute for the Philosophy of Information in 
Xi'An under the direction of Professor Wu Kun.

This increased activity in the area of the philosophy of information 
(another major Workshop is planned this Spring) raises the issue of the 
relation between the science and philosophy of information as well as of 
the philosophy of science. I am aware of and agree with the position 
expressed by Pedro that information science in the FIS framework should 
emphasize scientific research in the sense of knowledge that is 
quantifiable and/or provable. However, I do not believe that either he 
or others of you intend to exclude rigorous qualitative knowledge, 
especially as it concerns the dual nature of information.

The ubiquitous presence of information in all disciplines, as emphasized 
by Wu, suggests an alternative relation linking philosophy, science and 
information that is NOT one of simple hierarchical inclusion or 
possession (of). One possibility is to say that it is information that 
links philosophy and science, but this formulation perhaps fails to 
recognize the general properties of the latter two.

Another possibility is to say that each of the three nominally 
independent disciplines are not independent, but that each provides a 
dynamic ontological and epistemological link to the other two, more or 
less strong or actual depending on the extent to which one wishes to 
emphasize certain aspects of knowledge.

I look forward to your comments regarding the pros and cons of such a 
conception. Thank you.

Best wishes,

Joseph

Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: colli...@ukzn.ac.za mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
Datum: 04.02.2013 18:57
An: fisfis@listas.unizar.es mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es
Betreff: [Fis] Society for the Philosophy of Information

http://www.socphilinfo.org/


--
Professor John Collier 
colli...@ukzn.ac.za mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
Philosophy and Ethics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa
T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292   F: +27 (31) 260 3031
http://web.ncf.ca/collierhttp://web.ncfhttp://web.ncf.ca/collier.ca/coll
ier 
http://web.ncf%3chttp:/web.ncf.ca/collier%3e.ca/collier

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

 


-- 
-
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X

Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-11 Thread John Collier
I guess I am at a loss to see them as separate 
discourses.  Especially in the domain of Information.

Contrary to what Stan said, I think that many of 
the major advances in science from Statistical 
Mechanics, to Relativity Theory to Quantum 
Mechanics did and continue to have a major 
philosophical component, and professional 
philosophers work with scientists directly in 
each of these fields, It used to be true in 
Computer Science, but is less so now. In 
Cognitive Science there is currently virtually 
now separation. In Biology there are many 
philosophers who work with biologists, and vice 
versa, but far too many who do not.

I think that technology is much more linked to 
industry than it is to the sciences above.

John

At 06:03 PM 2013/02/11, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:
How does one measure the synergy among three discourses?
That is an interesting question within information theory (as part of both
science and philosophy).

Best,
Loet


-Original Message-
From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On
Behalf Of Pedro C. Marijuan
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:29 PM
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative
Relation] S.Brier

 Original Message 
Subject:SV: [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An
Alternative
Relation
Date:   Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:32:04 +0100
From:   Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk
To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch joe.bren...@bluewin.ch, Pedro Clemente
Marijuan Fernandez pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es
fis@listas.unizar.es, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
References: 6043399.89641360255002322.javamail.webm...@bluewin.ch



Dear Joseph



I go for each of the three nominally independent disciplines are not
independent, but that each provides a dynamic ontological and
epistemological link to the other two, more or less strong or actual
depending on the extent to which one wishes to emphasize certain aspects
of knowledge. Science without philosophy is stupid but philosophy
without science is blind. I am for a synergetic interaction.





Best wishes



   Søren Brier



Professor in the semiotics of information, cognition and commmunication
science,

department of International Business Communication, Copenhagen Business
School,

Dalgas Have 15, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark,









*Fra:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
[mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] *På vegne af *joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
*Sendt:* 7. februar 2013 17:37
*Til:* Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez; fis@listas.unizar.es; John Collier
*Emne:* [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation



Dear FIS Colleagues,

The formation of the the Society for the Philosophy of Information at
the University of Hertfordshire is announced in the link in John's note.
It includes the announcement and Call for Papers of the International
Conference on the Philosophy of Information to be held in Xi'An, China
in October, 2013, sponsored by both the above Society, led by Professor
Luciano Floridi and the Institute for the Philosophy of Information in
Xi'An under the direction of Professor Wu Kun.

This increased activity in the area of the philosophy of information
(another major Workshop is planned this Spring) raises the issue of the
relation between the science and philosophy of information as well as of
the philosophy of science. I am aware of and agree with the position
expressed by Pedro that information science in the FIS framework should
emphasize scientific research in the sense of knowledge that is
quantifiable and/or provable. However, I do not believe that either he
or others of you intend to exclude rigorous qualitative knowledge,
especially as it concerns the dual nature of information.

The ubiquitous presence of information in all disciplines, as emphasized
by Wu, suggests an alternative relation linking philosophy, science and
information that is NOT one of simple hierarchical inclusion or
possession (of). One possibility is to say that it is information that
links philosophy and science, but this formulation perhaps fails to
recognize the general properties of the latter two.

Another possibility is to say that each of the three nominally
independent disciplines are not independent, but that each provides a
dynamic ontological and epistemological link to the other two, more or
less strong or actual depending on the extent to which one wishes to
emphasize certain aspects of knowledge.

I look forward to your comments regarding the pros and cons of such a
conception. Thank you.

Best wishes,

Joseph

Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: colli...@ukzn.ac.za mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
Datum: 04.02.2013 18:57
An: fisfis@listas.unizar.es mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es
Betreff: [Fis] Society for the Philosophy of Information

http://www.socphilinfo.org/


--
Professor John Collier
colli...@ukzn.ac.za 

Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-11 Thread Steven Ericsson-Zenith
John,

When you say philosophers do you mean theorists? And, if not, what 
distinguishes the two? 

What would a philosophical component of information theory look like? Does 
such a component simply speak about the existential status of information? Is 
there some epistemology involved? Are there ethical imperatives that I could 
draw from such a philosophy?

Steven



On Feb 11, 2013, at 9:38 AM, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za wrote:

 I guess I am at a loss to see them as separate 
 discourses.  Especially in the domain of Information.
 
 Contrary to what Stan said, I think that many of 
 the major advances in science from Statistical 
 Mechanics, to Relativity Theory to Quantum 
 Mechanics did and continue to have a major 
 philosophical component, and professional 
 philosophers work with scientists directly in 
 each of these fields, It used to be true in 
 Computer Science, but is less so now. In 
 Cognitive Science there is currently virtually 
 now separation. In Biology there are many 
 philosophers who work with biologists, and vice 
 versa, but far too many who do not.
 
 I think that technology is much more linked to 
 industry than it is to the sciences above.
 
 John
 
 At 06:03 PM 2013/02/11, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:
 How does one measure the synergy among three discourses?
 That is an interesting question within information theory (as part of both
 science and philosophy).
 
 Best,
 Loet
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On
 Behalf Of Pedro C. Marijuan
 Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:29 PM
 To: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative
 Relation] S.Brier
 
  Original Message 
 Subject:SV: [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An
 Alternative
 Relation
 Date:   Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:32:04 +0100
 From:   Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk
 To: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch joe.bren...@bluewin.ch, Pedro Clemente
 Marijuan Fernandez pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es
 fis@listas.unizar.es, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za
 References: 6043399.89641360255002322.javamail.webm...@bluewin.ch
 
 
 
 Dear Joseph
 
 
 
 I go for each of the three nominally independent disciplines are not
 independent, but that each provides a dynamic ontological and
 epistemological link to the other two, more or less strong or actual
 depending on the extent to which one wishes to emphasize certain aspects
 of knowledge. Science without philosophy is stupid but philosophy
 without science is blind. I am for a synergetic interaction.
 
 
 
 
 
 Best wishes
 
 
 
  Søren Brier
 
 
 
 Professor in the semiotics of information, cognition and commmunication
 science,
 
 department of International Business Communication, Copenhagen Business
 School,
 
 Dalgas Have 15, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark,
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *Fra:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
 [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] *På vegne af *joe.bren...@bluewin.ch
 *Sendt:* 7. februar 2013 17:37
 *Til:* Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez; fis@listas.unizar.es; John Collier
 *Emne:* [Fis] Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation
 
 
 
 Dear FIS Colleagues,
 
 The formation of the the Society for the Philosophy of Information at
 the University of Hertfordshire is announced in the link in John's note.
 It includes the announcement and Call for Papers of the International
 Conference on the Philosophy of Information to be held in Xi'An, China
 in October, 2013, sponsored by both the above Society, led by Professor
 Luciano Floridi and the Institute for the Philosophy of Information in
 Xi'An under the direction of Professor Wu Kun.
 
 This increased activity in the area of the philosophy of information
 (another major Workshop is planned this Spring) raises the issue of the
 relation between the science and philosophy of information as well as of
 the philosophy of science. I am aware of and agree with the position
 expressed by Pedro that information science in the FIS framework should
 emphasize scientific research in the sense of knowledge that is
 quantifiable and/or provable. However, I do not believe that either he
 or others of you intend to exclude rigorous qualitative knowledge,
 especially as it concerns the dual nature of information.
 
 The ubiquitous presence of information in all disciplines, as emphasized
 by Wu, suggests an alternative relation linking philosophy, science and
 information that is NOT one of simple hierarchical inclusion or
 possession (of). One possibility is to say that it is information that
 links philosophy and science, but this formulation perhaps fails to
 recognize the general properties of the latter two.
 
 Another possibility is to say that each of the three nominally
 independent disciplines are not independent, but that each provides a
 dynamic ontological and epistemological link to the