Re: Abstractism

From: Dace (
Date: Fri Feb 01 2002 - 20:44:46 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "Words and memes"

    Received: by id UAA07807 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 20:49:20 GMT
    Message-ID: <005d01c1ab61$4a12ad80$0d86b2d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Abstractism
    Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:44:46 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    > >From: Joe Dees
    > >
    > >> But this is because differential light patterns propel a visual array
    > >into your eyes, where it is fed into your occipital lobes, from outside.
    > >>>>
    > >
    > >Alright. So where's the "information" in there? Where's does the
    > >"representation" come in? These are not physical properties and
    > >cannot be located anywhere in spacetime, i.e. the universe, be it your
    > > brain or the sun.
    > >
    > The information is in the configuration of the letters in the alphabet to
    form words,

    As I've said, it's not the configuration of the molecules of ink; it's our
    interpretation of the configuration.

    > If you look for an element called 'representatium" like one would look for
    hydrogen, you're bound to fail, but if you seek meaning, information and
    representation in configuration you will find them, for that is where they
    are, and such configuration is indeed stored in the brain (as well as in
    books and other places, using different coding schemas).

    Physics deals with the structure of matter as well as its components.
    There's no physical structure called "information" or "representation."
    Electrons and quarks are contained in atomic structures. Atoms are
    contained in chemical structures. Those are the only kind of structures
    you'll find in the ink on a page.

    > Unless they are physically configured in the commonly agreed upon shapes
    and these shapes are combined in commonly agreed upn ways to form commonly
    agreed upon words, we read nothing.

    Exactly. It's our interpretation of the configurations, not the
    configurations themselves, in which the meaning lies.

    > There is a huge physical and configurational difference between ink
    spilled on a page and ink written on that page in the form of words.

    And it's in our interpretation of this configurational difference that
    determines what is "word" and what is not.

    > I think that just about everyone here (with the possible exception of you)
    would agree that information is encoded in configuration.

    You better call on the herd to back you up, 'cause you've got nothing else.


    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 : Fri Feb 01 2002 - 20:57:57 GMT