RE: Information

From: Ryan, Angela (ARyan@french.ucc.ie)
Date: Tue May 15 2001 - 20:28:08 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Information"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA01585 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 15 May 2001 21:33:42 +0100
    Content-return: allowed
    Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:28:08 +0100
    From: "Ryan, Angela" <ARyan@french.ucc.ie>
    Subject: RE: Information
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Message-id: <49AB9D0C6521D84ABD017BF83CDF44C408D77A@xch1.ucc.ie>
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    May I throw in Bourdieu's idea:

    "Dès qu'on traite le langage comme un objet autonome, [...] on se condamne à
    chercher le pouvoir des mots dans les mots, c'est-à-dire là où il n'est pas:
    [...]. Ce n'est que par exception [...] que les échanges symboliques se
    réduisent à des rapports de pure communication et que le contenu informatif
    du message épuise le contenu de la communication. Le pouvoir des paroles
    n'est autre chose que le pouvoir délégué du porte-parole: et ses paroles
    [...] sont tout au plus un témoignage ... de la garantie de délégation dont
    il est investi. [...] l'autorité advient au langage du dehors...
    [Pierre Bourdieu, Ce Que Parler veut dire, p 103-5]

    I shan't insult you by translating! I find my students find Bourdieu less
    clear in translation to English, than in the French, perhaps that is
    generally true. His idea is that language and power are intimately and
    inevitably connected. I would add that we know what we mean, once we have
    said it: and further, that statements like:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
    that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that
    amongst these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness [...]
    that governments are instituted among men, which derive their just power
    from the consent of the governed..."

    are true, but not so; they become true when enunciated (who would contradict
    the above?) and are enabled to become so once said. As for Bourdieu's
    discours d'autorité, the solution he advances to our incredible, and
    dangerous, tendency to believe 'authoritative" discourse, is to generate
    what he calls discours hérétique, which will act upon the real by acting
    upon representations of the real.

    Oh well, back to marking essays, from which this list is an interesting
    distraction. (Except for the spectator-sport metalanguage, because the
    brain-speed reduction needed to read it crashes the system - it's a woman
    thing.)

    Yours sincerely,
    Angela
     

     -----Original Message-----
    From: Vincent Campbell [mailto:v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk]
    Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 4:14 PM
    To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
    Subject: RE: Information

            Butting in briefly...

            <Your dogmatism is futile. Look up "information theory" and/or
    > "communication theory" in any relevant reference work. For students in
    > computing, telecoms and physics, this is first year stuff.>
    >
            Computing, telecoms and physics do not have the monopoly on
    information/ communication theory, indeed one could argue their uses are as
    peculiar and non-generalisable as the term culture is in chemistry. If you
    want to ignore fields like linguistics, semiotics and communication studies,
    then fine, but such disciplines clearly have strong ideas about what terms
    like information and communication mean, and if you look up such terms
    in_their_reference works I think you'll find them rather closer to what
    Joe's been arguing. (As I think I've said before, Shannon & Weaver's model,
    for example, went out with the ark in Communication Studies).

            Perhaps this is at the root of your disagreement- you and Joe are at
    cross (disciplinary) purposes?

            Vincent

    ===============================================================
    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 15 2001 - 21:37:25 BST