Caro Sun, e cari tutti, ecco la traduzione in inglese del messaggio del 21
on February 8 I sent you a message whose content, without any presumption,
can be useful to resolve the over-epistemo-logical issues that have arisen.
Then I send it
l'8 febbraio Vi ho inviato un messaggio il cui contenuto, senza alcuna
presunzione, può essere utile per dirimere le questioni
onto-epistemo-logiche che sono sorte.
Allora lo trasmetto nuovamente.
Caro Terry estensibile a tutti,
è sempre un piacere leggerTi e capirTi. La general
In the first half of this month, we have a heated discussion about the
relationship among Information, Language, and Communication started by Sung. I
am simply summing up part of the different opinions as follows:
Sung: Without a language, no communication would be
Dear Koichiro and colleagues,
The ancient Greeks had several notions of time. The main point for our
discussion seems to me the distinction between historical time and event
time. Trajectories, for example, can be formed in historical time by
series of relations; trajectories are observable.
I completely agree that there is an important distinction between the
communication between attached beams and the semantic communication between
agents. Like you, I have long been interested in the evolution of biological
signaling systems. My dissertation research included
Thanks for your comments.
Interpretation and agency are indeed key items. An approach based on internal
constraint saisfactiont allows to address them together, with autonomy also.
In a few words:
An agent is an entity submitted to internal constraints and capable of actions
I want to pick on Christophe’s post to make a general plea about FIS posting.
This is not a comment on meaning generation by agents. Christophe wrote:
"Keeping in mind that communications exist only because agents need to manage
meanings for given purposes”.
This seems to imply
Dear Terry and FISers,
It looks indeed reasonable to position the term 'language' as ‘simply referring
to the necessity of a shared medium of communication’. Keeping in mind that
communications exist only because agents need to manage meanings for given
And the concept of agent can be
Hello Terry, Sung, FIS colleagues
There is a notion of “body language”.
Perhaps it might be possible to develop a general theory of language that can
take into account bacteria and dogs (according to Nature
Dear Javier and Dear Stan,
1. I very much agree with you as follows:
“I think that only signals can be transmitted, not information. Information can
only be gained by an observer (a self-referential system) that draws a
A Chinese scholar Dongsheng Miao’s argument is:
your analysis about Wittgenstein does not take into account the second
Wittgenstein, who repudiated his own idea from the Tractatus.
I think, in touch with Carnap on other issues, that the use of the terms
"symbol", "signal", "marker", "information" into scientific sentences does
Using the logical language to understand Nature
The discussion in this group refocuses on the meaning of the terms
“symbol”, “signal”, “marker” and so forth. This is a very welcome
development, because understanding the tools one uses is usually helpful
when creating great works.
Xueshan -- I think one can condense some of your insights hierarchically,
In a system having language, information seemingly may be obtained in other
ways as well. It would be a conceptually broader category. Thus (using the
[information [language [signal]]]
I have read the article "The languages of bacteria" which Gordana
recommended, and has gained a lot of inspiration from it. In combination
with Sung's comparative linguistics exploration on cell language and human
language, I have the following learning feelings to share with
Hi Terry, and FISers,
Can it be that "language metaphor" is akin to a (theoretical) knife that, in
the hands of a surgeon, can save lives but, in a wrong hand, can kill?
All the best.
From: Francesco Rizzo <13francesco.ri...@gmail.com>
Caro Terry estensibile a tutti,
è sempre un piacere leggerTi e capirTi. La general theory of information è
preceduta da un sistema (o semiotica) di significazione e seguita da un
sistema (o semiotica ) di comunicazione. Tranne che quando si ha un
processo comunicativo come il passaggio di un
In previous posts I have disparaged using language as the base model for
building a general theory of information.
Though I realize that this may seem almost heretical, it is not a claim
that all those who use linguistic analogies are wrong, only that it can be
In principle I agree with Terry. I have been thinking of this, though I am
still not able to make a sound formulation of the idea. Still I am afraid
that if I miss the chance to make at least a brief formulation of it I will
lose the opportunity to make a brainstorming with you. So, here it comes:
In agreement with Sung I see the value of “language metaphor" that can be
applied to physical objects when they are used for communication.
Description of “chemical language” used by bacteria can be found e.g. here
http://genesdev.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1468.full.pdfStephan and number of
Mail list logo