[Fis] Fwd: TR: RE: How Molecules Became Signs. One Way Out.

Thu Mar 17 14:13:06 CET 2022

Dear Joe,
as you know, I share this thought that I have been affirming for 40 years:
meaning cannot not be connected to reality in potential form.
A hug from Francesco

Il giorno gio 17 mar 2022 alle ore 11:58 Karl Javorszky <
karl.javorszky en gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Yes, this is absolutely correct
> *Meaningful information is reality in potential form*
>
> *Congratulations! *
>
>
> joe.brenner en bluewin.ch <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch> schrieb am Do., 17. März
> 2022, 11:34:
>
>> Dear Christophe and All,
>>
>> In his note, reproduced below, Christophe provides an interim answer to
>> my first response to his of the same day (March 13). In looking at the
>> relation between Information and Meaning, he looked forward (as I certainly
>> do) to further input by Terry regarding the potential of information as
>> meaning and the process of emergence. (One should perhaps better write
>> information_as_meaning.) In the meantime, I offer my own interpretation
>> from my recent (2020) book with Andrei Igamberdiev:
>>
>>
>> "I summarized the concept developed in LIR (Logic in Reality) in the
>> following points:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.      Information generation and transfer occur in nature as a natural
>> process that is constituted by and requires energy.
>>
>> 2.      Information is present throughout nature, but its conversion to
>> meaning requires organisms capable of recursive processing of it.
>>
>> 3.      Meaning is constituted by all the information valuable to a
>> living organism for its survival, reproduction and well-being.
>>
>> 4.      Information processes follow principles applicable to energy and
>> energetic processes in general
>>
>>
>>
>> Many authors have noted the complexity of information and the difficulty
>> of giving a ‘single, clear’ definition of it. Attempts to do so are typical
>> of standard substance ontologies, where firm definitions – identities - are
>> automatically given preference. The failure of such attempts suggests that
>> a major categorial error is being made. I therefore made the following
>> lapidary statement:
>>
>>
>>
>> *Meaningful information is reality in potential form.*
>>
>>
>>
>> It is derived from the Lupasco/LIR conception of consciousness which
>> basically looks at the real dialectical interactions in and between
>> internal and external, and internalizing and externalizing processes as
>> they move between potentiality and actuality.
>>
>> I suggest that the above can be placed in relation to Christophe's
>> Systemic Theory of Meaning, most recently of March 2020, (his reference
>> MENITA-7 below), which constitutes the primarily epistemological part of a
>> more complete theory embodying my ontological ideas as well.
>> These fit well, at least in my view, with Christophe's treatment of
>> anxiety in which potential states are critical, also for emergence.
>>
>> Thank you and best wishes,
>> Joseph
>>
>> *De :* Christophe Menant <christophe.menant en hotmail.fr>
>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 13 mars 2022 18:26
>> *À :* joe.brenner en bluewin.ch <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
>> *Objet :* RE: RE: [Fis] How Molecules Became Signs. One Way Out.
>> OFF-LINE for one point
>>
>>
>> Joseph,
>>
>> We can agree that a process transforms an input into an output.
>> Reverse engineering, as I know it,  is a tool to improve processes. We
>> know what we want at the output. We look at how the process builds it in
>> order to see if it is the best way to do so (other ways may exist and be
>> better).
>> The output is then the starting point. It needs to be clearly defined and
>> understood to address possible improvements of the process that builds it.
>> Our case is about an evolutionary process that transforms meaningless
>> states present in a-biotic matter into meaningful states present in living
>> matter. We need there a precise definition of what is expected as output of
>> the process (meaningful information) in order to look at how the
>> evolutionary process may have produced it.
>>
>> Best
>> Christophe
>> ------------------------------
>> *De :* joe.brenner en bluewin.ch <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 13 mars 2022 15:12
>> *À :* christophe.menant en hotmail.fr <christophe.menant en hotmail.fr>
>> *Objet :* Re: RE: [Fis] How Molecules Became Signs. One Way Out.
>> OFF-LINE for one point
>>
>> Before giving a full response to your very promising note, please let me
>> ask you one question about reverse engineering: is it really necessary to
>> know the *outcome *of the process, which may be difficult or impossible?
>> If Information IS Meaning, then the relative weight of actual and potential
>> defines the probability of an outcome, not the outcome itself. Qu'est-ce
>> que tu en dit?
>>
>> Best,
>> Joseph
>>
>> ----Message d'origine----
>> De : christophe.menant en hotmail.fr
>> Date : 13/03/2022 - 14:46 (CEST)
>> À : joe.brenner en bluewin.ch
>> Cc : fis en listas.unizar.es, deacon en berkeley.edu
>> Objet : RE: [Fis] How Molecules Became Signs. One Way Out
>>
>> Thanks Joseph for your position.
>>
>> If I understand you well:
>> 1) There is information and meaning in our world (I&M).
>> 2) There is no information nor meaning in an a-biotic/inert world.
>> 3) In that a-biotic/inert world there is only “potential for information
>> as meaning”.
>> 4) Information is defined in the process of its emergence from some
>> energetic ground.
>>
>> In addition, I feel we can say that:
>> a) I&M can be defined (https://philpapers.org/rec/MENITA-7
>> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fphilpapers.org%2Frec%2FMENITA-7&data=04%7C01%7C%7C51d6eef991104b4f37b108da04fb8e0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637827775706215913%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=e2LmaRbblxmlDLTa90ByDnVicS4oek6hA%2Bjm4g4qb8c%3D&reserved=0>
>> ).
>> b) Having from Terry his definitions for I&M would allow a better
>> understanding of the “potential for information as meaning” and of the
>> “process of emergence”.
>> This is about the well known reverse engineering activity where the
>> outcome of a process is available, and when we look for some understanding
>> about the process itself. The more we know about the outcome of the
>> process, the more we can pretend understanding the process.
>> Here we need to clearly know the outcome of the process. We need
>> definitions for I&M by Terry. Their availability is needed to look at
>> understanding the “potential for information as meaning” and the
>> “process of emergence”.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Christophe
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *De :* joe.brenner en bluewin.ch <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 13 mars 2022 11:51
>> *À :* christophe.menant en hotmail.fr <christophe.menant en hotmail.fr>
>> *Cc :* fis en listas.unizar.es <fis en listas.unizar.es>; deacon en berkeley.edu <
>> deacon en berkeley.edu>
>> *Objet :* Re: [Fis] How Molecules Became Signs. One Way Out
>>
>> Dear Friends and Colleagues,
>>
>> There is one way out of the dilemma which has not been directly refuted.
>> When Christophe and others ask if can we talk of information in an a-biotic
>> or pre-biotic world, if information means something actual, present, the
>> answer is no. If one asks instead did  the *potential * for  information
>> as meaning exist, the answer for me is yes.
>>
>> An additional statement must be added, otherwise the above is no more
>> than a trivial tautology. It is that information is defined in the process
>> of its emergence from some energetic ground. Since no process, nothing *in
>> process* is complete, complete and *incomplete *parts of the process are
>> present simultaneously and dynamically. The locus of this "nascent"
>> information is the detailed physico-chemical structure of the living
>> entities involved and their non-living constituents. These or parts of them
>> move from actual to potential and *vice versa *and this movement is what
>> ultimately defines their meaning.
>>
>> One reading of the above is that I have given a new interpretation of the
>> nature of a sign. I would gladly accept this, provided it can be
>> subsequently decided whether or not the concept of sign adds further
>> information. It may not.
>>
>> Thank you and best wishes,
>> Joseph
>>
>>
>>
>> ----Message d'origine----
>> De : christophe.menant en hotmail.fr
>> Date : 13/03/2022 - 00:02 (CEST)
>> À : deacon en berkeley.edu, fis en listas.unizar.es
>> Objet : [Fis] How Molecules Became Signs
>>
>> Dear Friends,
>> that war is a horrible drama for innocent civilians. And I agree with
>> your comments.
>> Our FIS discussions cannot bring much help to that human drama, but our
>> tentative analysis of what is “information” may somehow lead to a better
>> understanding of human motivations guide behaviors.
>> Let me add another comment to Terry’s work.
>>
>> Dear Terry,
>> In addition to my Feb 23 post I would appreciate some information on
>> parts of your paper I may not have understood that well.
>> Regarding the concept of information, you consider that information in a
>> pragmatic-functional sense can be understood in terms of molecular
>> evolution.
>> This brings to consider that “information” is present in an a-biotic or
>> pre-biotic world (a purely molecular world). Such pre-biotic world has
>> existed before the emergence of life in our universe. But can we talk of
>> information and meaning, of signs, in such a world? How should they be
>> understood in a purely material world devoid of living entities?
>> As said,  it would be nice if you could clarify these points by making
>> available definitions for information, meaning and sign in such an a-biotic
>> world. This would allow a better understanding of your starting point.
>> Also, I do not see that well using the Peircean term of “Interpretant”
>> for an inert world. We know that the Interpretant (the meaning) needs an
>> Interpreter (the meaning generator). So introducing Interpretants in your
>> paper also brings to introduce Interpreters in an inert world. Your
>> sentence “In Peircean terms, this amounts to asking what sort of molecular
>> system is competent to produce the Interpretants” is equivalent to: “what
>> sort of molecular system is competent to generate meanings”. I’m not sure
>> that meaning generation by a molecular system in a purely material and
>> inert world can be clearly understood by today science or philosophy.
>> And I do not remember Peirce theory of sign being about inert matter. Could
>> you tel us more about your position on these subject?
>> Thanks again for your time
>> Christophe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis en listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada
>> por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información 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 está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información 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 está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> baja desde la propia aplicación 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/20220317/31841455/attachment-0001.html>