Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA19989 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 2 May 2001 19:41:28 +0100 Subject: Re: Information Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 14:37:01 -0400 x-sender: email@example.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "memetics list" <email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20010502183712.AAA20344@firstname.lastname@example.org> Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On 05/02/01 12:54, Robin Faichney said this-
>> Information about something is hardly relevant _until_ it _can_ be used,
>> and for all purposes and intent, has no existence until it _is_ used.
>So you agree with Joe that unapprehended things cannot be said to exist?
>This is more like philosophical idealism than scientific rationalism.
I agree that until the information is _derived_ from whatever system that
process is resident within, it is without value and irrelevant.
That is far from saying it is not there.
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 02 2001 - 19:46:30 BST