Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA17000 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 1 May 2001 19:13:56 +0100 From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 13:15:10 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Information Message-ID: <3AEEB6DE.18806.39FF8D@localhost> In-reply-to: <20010501175304.A1297@ii01.org> References: <3AED8233.15786.6E25AE@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:18:11PM -0500 X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 1 May 2001, at 17:53, Robin Faichney wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:18:11PM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
> > On 30 Apr 2001, at 14:05, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr
> 29, 2001 at 05:28:32PM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote: > > > On 29
> Apr 2001, at 13:13, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > where the > > topic of
> interest > > is the relationship between mind and matter, it > > seems
> important to me > > to incorporate the latter, which I do by > > using
> "information" as the > > concept is used in physics, and > >
> differentiating that from the more > > common concept by prepending >
> > "physical", thus: "physical information". > > This is material > >
> structure. > > > All information is encoded in some physical > >
> substrate, so your > addition of "material" is redundant. > > > > Not
> so. Physical information, being material structure, is unencoded. > >
> This distinguishes it from intentional information which is, as you >
> > say, encoded in physical information. > > > No, the isolated and
> nonrelational structure just sits there, > informing no one. It
> becomes information when it informs > someone. You are confusing
> pattern or configuration with > information, which must be amenable
> to informing.
>
> "Information" is a word that, like every other word, can be used any
> way anyone wants to use it. I choose to use it in a way that's
> consistent with modern practice in general, and its use in physics in
> particular, while very clearly distinguishing between such technical
> use ("physical information"), and the ordinary concept ("intentional
> information").
>
> Your silliness has exhausted my patience for now, so don't expect any
> more responses from me in the near future.
>
Physicists are aware of those things to which they refer as
information, are they not? In other words, they are INFORMed
concerning them. This hardly seems silly, but it DOES seem
blindingly obvious.
> --
> Robin Faichney
> Get your Meta-Information from http://www.ii01.org
> (CAUTION: contains philosophy, may cause heads to spin)
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Tue May 01 2001 - 19:17:22 BST