[Fis] Fwd: PRINCIPLES OF IS

[Michel Godron]

About the principles :

La philosophie, seule, se trouve présenter ce double caractère[parce 
qu'elle propose ] une cause de toute chose et un_principe,_ (...) Toutes 
les autres sciences sont donc plus nécessaires qu'elles, mais aucune ne 
l'emporte en excellence." (Métaphysique A, 983 a).


"Il est extrêmement difficile pour les hommes d'arriver aux 
connaissances universelles, car elles sont le plus en dehors de la 
portée des sens. Les sciences les plus exactes sont celles qui sont le 
plus sciences des principes (ta prwta). Celles qui partent de principes 
plus simples sont plus exactes que celles qui partent de principes plus 
complexes, comme l'arithmétique est plus exacte que la géométrie. Mais 
une science est d'autant plus propre à enseigner qu'elle approfondit 
davantage les causes, car ceux-là enseignent qui disent les causes de 
chaque chose ... Le connaissable par excellence, ce sont les principes 
et les causes. La science la plus élevée, et qui est supérieure à tout 
science subordonnée, est celle qui connaît en vue de quelle fin il faut 
faire quelque chose. Et cette fin est le bien de chaque être et, d'une 
manière générale c'est le souverain Bien dans l'ensemble de la nature 
... ce doit être en effet la science théorétique des premiers principes 
et des premières causes, car le bien, c'est-à-dire la fin est l'une de 
ces causes. (Métaphysique A, 982 a et b).

Cordialement. M. Godron


Le 22/09/2017 à 14:20, Pedro C. Marijuan a écrit :
> Dear FISers,
>
> Taking seriously the idea of information principles, quite probably 
> demands a specific discussion on principles. Why do we need 
> "principles" at all? Because of our cognitive limitations. An infinite 
> intellect would traverse all spans of knowledge without any 
> discontinuity--presumably. In our collective scientific enterprise, 
> however, we create special disciplines in order to share 
> understandable discourses between the limited individuals of each 
> thought-collective. As knowledge accumulates and gets more and more 
> complex, particularly in the encounter with other discourses, the 
> growing epistemic distances fragment the original discipline, and a 
> new subdiscipline becomes necessary. It starts then a fresh new 
> discourse, with its own principles. In my brief mention of Ortega, 
> what he accuses Leibnitz is that being the champion of principles in 
> science, he becomes fragmentary and asystematic in his 
> meta-scientific/philosophical "mode of thinking": the hypersystematic 
> expresses himself fragmentarily (Ortega dixit). It is curious that 
> along the survey of principles in Ortega's book, the most frequent 
> interlocutor is not Leibnitz, but Aristotle! Although Husserl, 
> Heidegger, Descartes, Pappus, Plato, Suarez, Spinoza... and some 
> others big names also appear, his main concern (to my taste) is 
> discussing Aristotle's view of specialized disciplines starting from 
> their respective principles, empirically-sensuously obtained and 
> "uncommunicated" in between the different fields. It is very intriguing.
>
> If the principles of different disciplines are factually 
> uncommunicated,  the info science view of a new body of knowledge 
> running across all scales is caught into a difficult "principled" 
> position. Nevertheless,  the three blocks I distinguished (info per 
> se, bioinfo, ecology of knowledge) seem to allow some fertile 
> conjugation inside/outside... but the problem remains. I think it is 
> solvable, as in our times there is a central element that allows a 
> whole new scientific discourse on information. The dense relationship 
> between life and information has nowadays acquired a formidable 
> empirical background, leveraged by the most basic 
> disciplines--physics, chemistry, computer science, and biology itself.
>
> More concretely, the notion of the "information flow" can almost be 
> sketched properly, both in its signaling textures and in the 
> fundamental relationship with the life cycle--and not very differently 
> along the evolutionary process. Thereafter, recombination appears as 
> one of the fundamental emergences in the growing complexity of the 
> evolving information dynamics around life cycles and 
> information/energy flows. The recombination phenomenon happens for the 
> knowledge-stocks of cells, nervous systems, enterprises, 
> sciences-technologies-cultures... It accumulates amazing combinatoric, 
> topological, dynamic, and closure properties in the different realms, 
> flowing up and down among scales, multidimensionally, and maintaining 
> afloa the whole game of adaptive existences.
>
> Our disciplines may apparently work by themselves, autonomously, but 
> actually they do not. Rather than "on top", they work "on tap". They 
> endlessly recombine in the ecology of knowledge, differently for each 
> problem and for each occasion, creating new theoretical and applied 
> subdisciplines in the thousands. Information science has to shed light 
> on that fundamental factor of contemporary societies. And more 
> "psychologically" this discipline has to put LIFE, both individual 
> life and social life, at the very center of the sharing of meaning. A 
> new way of thinking starting from specific information principles will 
> liberate our limited intellects to more creative endeavors. It is time 
> to quote Whitehead: "Civilization advances by extending the number of 
> important operations which we can perform without thinking about them. 
> Operations of thought are like cavalry charges in a battle —they are 
> strictly limited in number, they require fresh horses, and must only 
> be made at decisive moments."
>
> Best wishes--Pedro
>
>
> El 20/09/2017 a las 17:46, Michel Godron escribió:
>>
>> My remarks are written in red
>>
>> Bien reçu votre message. MERCI. Cordialement. M. Godron
>> Le 20/09/2017 à 13:54, Pedro C. Marijuan a écrit :
>>> Dear FISers,
>>>
>>> Many thanks for all the comments and criticisms. Beyond concrete 
>>> agreements/disagreements the discussion is lively, and that is the 
>>> main point. It is complicate pointing at some fundamental, ultimate 
>>> reality based on disciplinary claims. Putting it differently, the 
>>> hierarchies between scientific disciplines were fashionable 
>>> particularly in the reductionism times; but now fortunately those 
>>> decades (70s, 80s) are far away. Actually, the new views taking 
>>> shape are not far from the term "knowledge recombination" that 
>>> appears in some of the principles discussed. Modern research could 
>>> be typified by being: curiosity-led, technologically driven, 
>>> multi-scaled, interdisciplinary, and integrative (paraphrasing 
>>> Cuthill et al., 2017). Contemporary philosophers like John Dupré 
>>> have dealt with some soft "perspectivism" but they do not deal with 
>>> the disciplinary recombination rigorously. I think this is one of 
>>> the main concerns of our nascent info-science.
>>> Rafael in his message enters into some undergrounds of the idea of 
>>> Principles/Methods/Explanations in the way Ortega discusses it for 
>>> Leibnitz. That book is particularly dense, and I am not aware of 
>>> interesting synthesis about it. One of its early claims is that 
>>> Principles have to be evident (intuitive for Husserl), useful for 
>>> verification and for the construction of logical proofs, and further 
>>> they  have to open "new ways of thinking" ("modos de pensar" for 
>>> Ortega).I fully agree.  For Leibnitz, according to Ortega, "thinking 
>>> is proving" so the classical emphasis was on the logical power of 
>>> principles. Leibniz has built une "combinatoire" calculable .But 
>>> their capability to support an inspiring new way of thinking was 
>>> ignored or just left implicit. Leibniz has largely developed new 
>>> ways of thinking, mainly in his /Théodicée//./ ! And this is a big 
>>> problem not only in our field but in many multidisciplinary 
>>> endeavors: excellent research ideas are accompanied by really vulgar 
>>> "metaphysics" (or better, metadisciplinary views). See for instance 
>>> the Big Data research on so-called "social physics". Or the 
>>> excellent book on "Scale" recently published (great at climbing from 
>>> atoms to cells, organisms, enterprises, and cities; but really poor 
>>> in the multifarious information/communication underlying worlds). 
>>> The book /Ecologie et évolution du monde vivant /showed how 
>>> Brillouin's  information helps to understand  Life at all scales by 
>>> self-organization. Would you like that I send two or three pages 
>>> explaining that in my poor english ?
>>> Anyhow, these are superficial comments inspired by the many 
>>> excellent messages exchanged. There is a self-organization of the 
>>> discussion taking place, and it is nice that we are concentrating 
>>> discussion on the 3 first principles, somehow devoted to information 
>>> per se. Once we smash these topics, we may go for the biologically 
>>> related (principles 4-6), later on for the recombination and ecology 
>>> of knowledge (principles 7-9), and finally for the ethical goals of 
>>> our new science efforts, as Joseph has commented (principle 10).
>>>
>>> Best whishes to all
>>> --Pedro
>>>
>>>
>>> The El 19/09/2017 a las 11:30, Pedro C. Marijuan escribió:
>>>>
>>>> -------- Mensaje reenviado --------
>>>>
>>>> Asunto: 	Re: [Fis] PRINCIPLES OF IS
>>>> Fecha: 	Tue, 19 Sep 2017 09:21:51 +0200
>>>> De: 	Rafael Capurro <rafael at capurro.de>
>>>> Responder a: 	rafael at capurro.de
>>>> Para: 	Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Pedro,
>>>>
>>>> a short comment to your intro to the 10 principles: I very much 
>>>> agree with your views (following Ortega) that information science 
>>>> can be conceived as a multifaceted or "multifarious" network of 
>>>> concepts and theories dealing phenomena partly related partly not 
>>>> (yet) related with each other for which we need different 
>>>> languages/concepts and 'translations' and kinds of calculations 
>>>> also with regard to their goals and 'utility'.
>>>>
>>>> If this makes sense, then we should try to develop some kind of 
>>>> 'principles' or 'archai' in the Greek sense, i.e., of 'initial 
>>>> forces' that give rise to possibilities of 'un-concealing' 
>>>> different kinds of phenomena that we could not see when 
>>>> disregarding other paths or by not entering through other 'portals' 
>>>> each portal announcing different kinds of what makes sense or not 
>>>> when entering the path.
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes it makes sense to go up and see the landscapes from the 
>>>> top, knowing that this view(s) from the top also conceal a lot of 
>>>> things on the bottom. It is easiear to understand these 
>>>> 'principles' if we have experience with walking in the mountains 
>>>> (but also in other natural and artificial environments like a 
>>>> forest, a desert, cities etc.). Maybe we could learn from such 
>>>> experiences which kind of 'principles' are to be conssidered in the 
>>>> 'methods' (hodos = path)  of scientific research.
>>>>
>>>> So, my suggestion is to invite our FIS colleagues to describe 
>>>> phenomenologically their walking experiences and 'principles' in 
>>>> different enviroments (mountains etc.) and try to 'translate' 
>>>> (trans-late) them into the field of information science.
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Rafael
>>>>
>>>>> Dear FIS Colleagues,
>>>>>
>>>>> As promised herewith the "10 principles of information science". A 
>>>>> couple of previous comments may be in order.
>>>>> First, what is in general the role of principles in science? I was 
>>>>> motivated by the unfinished work of philosopher Ortega y Gasset, 
>>>>> "The idea of principle in Leibniz and the evolution of deductive 
>>>>> theory" (posthumously published in 1958). Our tentative 
>>>>> information science seems to be very different from other 
>>>>> sciences, rather multifarious in appearance and concepts, and 
>>>>> cavalierly moving from scale to scale. What could be the specific 
>>>>> role of principles herein? Rather than opening homogeneous realms 
>>>>> for conceptual development, these information principles would 
>>>>> appear as a sort of "portals" that connect with essential topics 
>>>>> of other disciplines in the different organization layers, but at 
>>>>> the same time they should try to be consistent with each other and 
>>>>> provide a coherent vision of the information world.
>>>>> And second, about organizing the present discussion, I bet I was 
>>>>> too optimistic with the commentators scheme. In any case, for 
>>>>> having a first glance on the whole scheme, the opinions of 
>>>>> philosophers would be very interesting. In order to warm up the 
>>>>> discussion, may I ask John Collier, Joseph Brenner and Rafael 
>>>>> Capurro to send some initial comments / criticisms? Later on, if 
>>>>> the commentators idea flies, Koichiro Matsuno and Wolfgang 
>>>>> Hofkirchner would be very valuable voices to put a perspectival 
>>>>> end to this info principles discussion (both attended the Madrid 
>>>>> bygone FIS 1994 conference)...
>>>>> But this is FIS list, unpredictable in between the frozen states 
>>>>> and the chaotic states! So, everybody is invited to get ahead at 
>>>>> his own, with the only customary limitation of two messages per week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes, have a good weekend --Pedro
>>>>>
>>>>> *10 **PRINCIPLES OF INFORMATION SCIENCE*
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Information is information, neither matter nor energy.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Information is comprehended into structures, patterns, 
>>>>> messages, or flows.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. Information can be recognized, can be measured, and can be  
>>>>> processed (either computationally or non-computationally).
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. Information flows are essential organizers of life's 
>>>>> self-production processes--anticipating, shaping, and mixing up 
>>>>> with the accompanying energy flows.
>>>>>
>>>>> 5. Communication/information exchanges among adaptive life-cycles 
>>>>> underlie the complexity of biological organizations at all scales.
>>>>>
>>>>> 6. It is symbolic language what conveys the essential 
>>>>> communication exchanges of the human species--and constitutes the 
>>>>> core of its "social nature."
>>>>>
>>>>> 7. Human information may be systematically converted into 
>>>>> efficient knowledge, by following the "knowledge instinct" and 
>>>>> further up by applying rigorous methodologies.
>>>>>
>>>>> 8. Human cognitive limitations on knowledge accumulation are 
>>>>> partially overcome via the social organization of "knowledge 
>>>>> ecologies."
>>>>>
>>>>> 9. Knowledge circulates and recombines socially, in a continuous 
>>>>> actualization that involves "creative destruction" of fields and 
>>>>> disciplines: the intellectual /Ars Magna./
>>>>>
>>>>> 10. Information science proposes a new, radical vision on the 
>>>>> information and knowledge flows that support individual lives, 
>>>>> with profound consequences for scientific-philosophical practice 
>>>>> and for social governance.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>>>>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>>>>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
>>>>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>>>>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
>>>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>>>>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
>>>>> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
>>>>> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Fis mailing list
>>>>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>>>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Prof.em. Dr. Rafael Capurro
>>>> Hochschule der Medien (HdM), Stuttgart, Germany
>>>> Capurro Fiek Foundation for Information Ethics (http://www.capurro-fiek-foundation.org)
>>>> Distinguished Researcher at the African Centre of Excellence for Information Ethics (ACEIE), Department of Information Science, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
>>>> Chair, International Center for Information Ethics (ICIE) (http://icie.zkm.de)
>>>> Editor in Chief, International Review of Information Ethics (IRIE) (http://www.i-r-i-e.net)
>>>> Postal Address: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
>>>> E-Mail:rafael at capurro.de
>>>> Voice: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
>>>> Homepage:www.capurro.de
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Fis mailing list
>>>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
>>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
>>> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
>>> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Fis mailing list
>>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>
>
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------
> Pedro C. Marijuán
> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
> pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20170923/1519ce1e/attachment.html>