Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA09671 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 4 Feb 2000 22:25:17 GMT From: "Dynsys Outlook" <sbennet@mail.dynsys.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: What are memes made of? Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 17:11:45 -0500 Message-ID: <NCBBIBAJCLOABPFMCAIBCELCCAAA.sbennet@mail.dynsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <v04220805b4ba18b58043@[154.15.11.196]> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Bravo. Now, where does knowledge take the continuium?
Alex Bennet
-----Original Message-----
From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
Of William van den Heuvel
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 6:38 AM
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: What are memes made of?
In response to your request for feedback, I would like to offer you
my view on information:
Your article seems to be based on the notion that "information is
simply the form, or structure, of matter". In my opinion, this notion
of information is in some sense inadequate. I am not saying it is
incorrect but the point I wish to make is that this is only a
relatively insignificant aspect. A much more significant aspect is
what the form means.
I am inclined to think that the information is not so much in the
form of the matter but much more in the meaning of the form.
Furthermore, this meaning is not encoded in the form itself but is
supplied by the observer of the form. An observer could be anything
from elementary particle to human being. I am just calling it
'observer' provisionally until someone proposes a better word. I
suppose 'interpreter' would also be alright. I guess you would call
it "decoding mechanism" but I think this is a somewhat misleading
term as it suggests that the meaning is encoded in the form, which is
what I question.
Whether or not a form constitutes information is determined during
the act of perception. Hence, without an observer or interpreter of
some kind the form can not be information. In other words, if there
is no perception of the form then there is no information either; it
would just be a meaningless shape. In other words, a form can not be
considered information without an interpreter who determines what it
means: it's the interpreter who turns a form into information. That's
why I regard it as somewhat inadequate to say that "information is
simply a form or structure of matter". This way of putting it gives
an ontological status to information that it doesn't deserve (in my
view).
I have tried to develop the idea of information a bit further by
making a distinction between information in the sense of "data", and
information in the sense of "meaning". As "data" the information has
physical characteristics, it can be copied, encoded, transmitted,
decoded, etc. But as "meaning" the information is implied by the
observer. Thus, I am proposing a notion of information that has a
dual aspect; data and meaning.
We could even consider the possibility of information that has no
physical form whatsoever. For instance, an interpreter can derive
meaning from the absence of a form. I.e. a missing form or a missing
signal can be perceived as meaningful. Therefore, absence (of form
and matter) may very well constitute information (in the sense of
meaning). This shows that information is not simply a form of matter
and not even a matter of form. At best we can say, information as
"form of matter" is only a special case. The primary aspect of
information is the meaning, which does not necessarily require a
particular form of matter.
This point can be emphasized by noting that different forms with
different physical characteristics can still have the same meaning,
i.e. they apparently carry the same informational content. I say
"apparently" because the form (or the missing form) doesn't actually
inform; it only initiates a process of unfoldment on the side of the
interpreter (resulting in a meaning). If different forms trigger the
same process of unfoldment (resulting in the same meaning) then they
can be said to be the same information regardless of their different
forms or physical characteristics. Similarly, if one and the same
physical form triggers different processes of unfoldment (resulting
in different meanings) then it can be said to be different
information regardless of the identical form. The essence of
information is whether it makes a difference. There may be different
physical forms but whether those differences make a difference in
meaning is determined by the observer. That why I think that
information as meaning is more significant than information as form,
or information as matter.
If you like to think in terms of "stances" then you could say
information as matter is the "physical stance", and information as
data is the "formal stance". But now I am tempted to suggest the
introduction of an additional stance; information as meaning, which
would be the "meaning stance". I think, each of these three stances
are correct but which of them is more relevant or useful probably
depends on the momentary intentions of the user.
I don't know if this view on information is of interest to you but
I'll just submit it for your consideration. If you see no value in it
then please disregard it.
William van den Heuvel
heuvel@muc.de
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 04 2000 - 22:25:20 GMT