Re: Information

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue May 08 2001 - 20:37:51 BST

  • Next message: Ryan, Angela: "memetics of the heroine"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA03122 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 8 May 2001 20:35:16 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 14:37:51 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Information
    Message-ID: <3AF804BF.18774.505BE1@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <20010505133035.A1058@ii01.org>
    References: <3AF2CDEF.20100.6C3DAE@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Fri, May 04, 2001 at 03:42:39PM -0500
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 5 May 2001, at 13:30, Robin Faichney wrote:

    > On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 03:42:39PM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
    > > On 3 May 2001, at 19:36, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > On Wed, May 02,
    > 2001 at 10:56:15PM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote: > > > > > We
    > cannot fall into the behaviorist trap of > > > dismissing the
    > unobserved as nonexistent... > > > > You seem very happy to do just
    > that regarding information. > > > But information is different, in
    > that unless it INFORMs someone, > that is, unless it is observed, it
    > is not INFORMation, but pattern or > configuration. It cannot possess
    > significance or meaning unless it > signifies or means something to
    > someone. I have no doubt that > unobserved pattern, structure and/or
    > configuration indeed exists, > but as it is unobserved, no one is
    > INFORMed concerning its > particularities, thus there is no INFORMing,
    > hence no > INFORMation. The systematically configured marks in books
    > only > become information when someone is writing or reading them.
    >
    > So what do you think of the use of "information" in communication
    > theory? Is that all wrong too? Are you the only one that's in step?
    >
    There is code, carrier and message in information theory, and the
    code encodes some semantic content (the message) in a medium
    of exchange (the carrier). It is sent by a sender and received by a
    rerceiver. The message is the way a sender INFORMS a receiver
    of a particular semantic content (the message) sent via a particular
    action/perception medium (the carrier) and using a commonly
    understood code. The person not commonly understanding both
    the premisis and consequences of information theory is you, Robin.

    > --
    > 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 08 2001 - 20:39:34 BST