[Fis] Fwd: The 10 Principles. Information as Process

Sat Sep 19 06:22:51 CEST 2020

Dear Joseph:

One could also use "informing" as a verb.

Let me take the liberty to quote as follows:

>Varela (1979, at p. 266) argued for defining “information” in 
>accordance with the semantic root of the word of “in-formare.” In a 
>similar vein, the anthropologist Bateson proposed defining information 
>as “a difference which makes a difference” (Bateson, 1972, at p. 315; 
>cf. MacKay, 1969). However, a difference may make a difference for one 
>system of reference but not, or differently, for another. In other 
>words, information would then no longer be defined analytically, but in 
>terms of what information means for a receiving system. In second-order 
>systems theory, this receiving system has been denoted as an “observer” 
>(e.g., Maturana, 1978; Von Foerster, 1982).
>
>[...] When the sending and receiving systems are considered as the 
>systems of reference and information is defined as “a difference which 
>makes a difference” for them, the definitions of information, meaning, 
>and discursive knowledge become entangled. The more abstract 
>perspective of information theory on the number of options and the 
>measurement of realized ones in terms of (e.g., bits of) information 
>tends to be lost.
>
>  In a recent book, César Hidalgo (2015, at p. 165), for example, has 
>defined “information” with reference “to the order embodied in codified 
>sequences, such as those found in music or DNA, while knowledge and 
>knowhow refer to the ability of a system to process information.” 
>However, codified knowledge can be abstract and—like music—does not 
>have to be “embodied” (e.g., Cowan, David, & Foray, 2000). Beyond 
>Hidalgo’s position, the philosopher Luciano Floridi (2010, p. 21) 
>proposed “a general definition of information” according to which “the 
>well-formed data are meaningful” (italics of the author). The 
>sociologist Niklas Luhmann (1995, p. 67) posits that “all information 
>has meaning.” In his opinion, information should therefore be 
>considered as a selection mechanism. Kauffman et al. (2008, at p. 28) 
>added to the confusion by defining information as “natural selection.”  
>(at p. 1182)
>

Best,
Loet

Leydesdorff, L., Johnson, M., & Ivanova, I. (2018). Toward a Calculus of 
Redundancy: Signification, Codification, and Anticipation in Cultural 
Evolution. Journal of the Association for Information Science and 
Technology, 69(10), 1181-1192. doi: 10.1002/asi.24052, at p. 1182.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Joseph Brenner" <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
To: "Krassimir Markov" <markov en foibg.com>
Cc: "fis" <fis en listas.unizar.es>
Sent: 9/18/2020 10:19:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Fwd: The 10 Principles. Information as Process

>Dear Pedro, Dear Krassimir,
>
>For me, the problem is clearly a result of using a common noun, 
>information, to describe a complex process rather than a participle 
>form – informationing. Then, “information IS a distinction” should be 
>replaced by “information (2) is produced in MAKING a distinction on an 
>adjacent difference = information (1). Then, of course the 1st 
>principle is recursive, but correctly so!
>
>Best,
>
>Joseph
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: Fis [mailto:fis-bounces en listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Krassimir 
>Markov
>Sent: vendredi, 18 septembre 2020 21:40
>To: FIS
>Subject: Re: [Fis] Fwd: The 10 Principles
>
>
>
>Dear Pedro,
>
>
>
>I still not agree with the first principle.
>In this form it is recursive!
>
>Information needs itself to became information, because difference 
>could not be distinguished without information.
>In this form, the first principle sound like this:
>
>
>
>Information is distinction of information !
>
>Sorry!
>
>
>
>Friendly greetings
>
>Krassimir
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From:Pedro C. Marijuan <mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs en aragon.es>
>
>Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 9:01 PM
>
>To:'fis' <mailto:fis en listas.unizar.es>
>
>Subject: Re: [Fis] Fwd: The 10 Principles
>
>
>
>Dear All,
>Thanks to Jose Javier for his comments. Regarding the loop you mention 
>about distinction, you are right, but this is a very characteristic of 
>life (see that Maturana and Varela already said something pretty 
>similar in their Tree of Knowledge). In the other biological principles 
>that follow (below)  I try to clarify that notion in several 
>directions, particularly concerning signaling systems, a concept which 
>was completely ignored until well in the 1990s. Your second comment may 
>be partially responded looking at those further principles dealing with 
>the symbolic communication via language and the social narratives, not 
>far from what you have pointed. Thus I include the whole principles 
>herein.
>
>1. Information is distinction on an adjacent difference.
>
>2. Information processes consist in organized action upon differences 
>collected onto structures, patterns, sequences, messages, or flows.
>
>3. Information flows are essential organizers of life's self-production 
>process –the life cycle– anticipating, shaping, and mixing up with the 
>accompanying energy flows.
>
>4. Proto-phenomena of meaning, knowledge, and cognition (& 
>intelligence) emerge via signaling systems of living cells, fully 
>developed in the action/perception cycle of central nervous systems.
>
>5. Information/communication exchanges among adaptive life-cycles 
>underlie the complexity of biological organization at all scales.
>
>6. It is symbolic language what conveys the essential communication 
>exchanges of individuals —and constitutes the core of human "social 
>nature."
>
>7. Human information can be transformed into efficient knowledge by 
>following the "knowledge instinct", further enhanced and delimited by 
>collectively applying rigorous methodologies.
>
>8. Human cognitive limitations are partially overcome via "knowledge 
>ecologies", where knowledge circulates and recombines socially in a 
>continuous actualization that involves "creative destruction" of 
>theories, practices, and disciplines.
>
>9. Narratives become encapsulated forms of “natural intelligence”, 
>tailored to capture collective attention and memory, and essential for 
>the cohesion of social, political, and economic structures.
>
>10. Information science proposes a new, radical vision on how 
>information and knowledge surround individual lives, with profound 
>consequences for scientific-philosophical practice and for social 
>governance.
>
>
>
>Briefly referring to the other discussion track (Christophe), I quite 
>agree with situating the origins of (genuine) meaning with living 
>beings, but have some trouble with "constraints" when generally applied 
>to biological cognition. I think they may be more useful in other 
>fields (originated in kinematics, they become more and more volatile as 
>used in Dynamic Systems Theory, and similarly weakened when going from 
>AI to biological cognition). For instance,  given 3,000 genes in Ecoli, 
>organized in mixed clusters of fiendish complexity, how do you 
>establish meaningful constraints? Or can even attribute separate 
>"functions"? You may see in DOI: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2015.07.002 
><https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.1016%2Fj.pbiomolbio.2015.07.002?_sg%5B0%5D=nH-ziIzFNlPKAqMszwKA9aJSdUF_He_Rfcal3jUKXaF_lvDrbTWXcTEDtf5uNRaHZMzJ0MFczgM3J-aub54-p6oiQA.Vi1baoaYqIl4vlby-pQVd58ob8urom6m0dhZo1yJ26_NjwihWirad9bxSivcVUymzy-vS1FcL9dD4ZQ7UDtz_w> 
>   the very dimensions of this ontology problem.
><https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.1016%2Fj.pbiomolbio.2015.07.002?_sg%5B0%5D=nH-ziIzFNlPKAqMszwKA9aJSdUF_He_Rfcal3jUKXaF_lvDrbTWXcTEDtf5uNRaHZMzJ0MFczgM3J-aub54-p6oiQA.Vi1baoaYqIl4vlby-pQVd58ob8urom6m0dhZo1yJ26_NjwihWirad9bxSivcVUymzy-vS1FcL9dD4ZQ7UDtz_w>
>
>Regarding Marcus' comment on life as imprecisely defined (and whether 
>viruses or Gaia are 'alive'), the fundamental issue in natural sciences 
>is "explaining" rather than defining. And fortunately the advancement 
>in our explanations of life in last decades has been fantastic. Life 
>can now be characterized in every basic aspect with amazing depth. One 
>cannot give a precise definition of life, but one can provide a list of 
>essential characteristics, and at the center are the informational 
>ones. Empirically, the point is that information appears to be so 
>ingrained in the molecular organization of life that scores of new 
>bio-disciplines have been recently launched around it: bioinformatics, 
>bioinformation, biocomputation, all the "omic" fields, signaling 
>science, etc. Biosemiotics could be included too, but Hélas, most 
>biosemioticians continue to "read" the DNA meaning via the genetic 
>code, rather than exploring the "signals" abduced from the environment 
>and "distinctionally worked out and transcribed in genes--from which 
>ultimately "meaning" emerges. About viruses concretely, they have been 
>essential in the origins of eukaryotic complexity and in the dynamic 
>balance of marine and terrestrial ecosystems... irrespective on how we 
>consider their degree of "aliveness". And finally "non comment" about 
>some (baiting?) expressions in your previous reply.
>
>I see right now the careful "review" by Loet: better for a next 
>occasion!
>
>Best--Pedro
>
>PS. The Three Messages per Week are counted following the international 
>business week (from Monday to Sunday included).
>
>--
>-------------------------------------------------
>Pedro C. Marijuán
>Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>
>pcmarijuan.iacs en aragon.es
>http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>-------------------------------------------------
>
>
><https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>Libre de virus. www.avast.com 
><https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>Fis mailing list
>Fis en listas.unizar.es
>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>----------
>INFORMACISN SOBRE PROTECCISN DE DATOS DE CARACTER PERSONAL
>
>Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada 
>por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>Puede encontrar toda la informacisn sobre como tratamos sus datos en el 
>siguiente enlace: 
>https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>Recuerde que si esta suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de 
>baja desde la propia aplicacisn en el momento en que lo desee.
>http://listas.unizar.es
>----------
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20200919/44ffcab5/attachment-0001.html>