[Fis] Contingency signals: AI Information, Decision and Learning

Sun Nov 30 14:42:28 CET 2025

Dear Krassimir,

Yes, that's precisely it! It means that the focus falls on designing the
whole human-machine system - which is very much what we did in creating the
original medical application that this paper is based on. Interestingly, I
think that in turn entails revisiting some old-fashioned computer science
challenges like Requirements Engineering.

So your mention of organisational design is spot-on - obviously we're quite
there yet - but the promise is clear I would say. There are connections to
be made with cybernetic theory which I'm pursuing at the moment that can
give us new approaches to operationalisation. What's happening in biology
is also extremely important. I really think now is a time for experiment,
though - there's so much to try.

I think with regard to your idea of "organisational metabolism", that's
been a cybernetic dream for decades, and something that Gordon Pask and
Stafford Beer were particularly fascinated by. Were they mad? Or were they
ahead of their time?

If I didn't suspect the latter, I wouldn't be able to garner my enthusiasm
for this stuff, which wanes very quickly if I only listen to AI merchants
selling ever-more "intelligent" language models!

Best wishes,

Mark

On Sat, 29 Nov 2025 at 21:42, Krassimir Markov <itheaiss at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Mark and Bill,
>
> I would like to talk about the information later; I am currently seriously
> busy with two large projects that are taking up a lot of my time.
>
> ***
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> Thank you for sharing your paper. I found your approach to indicating the
> degrees of contingency in decision-making very thought-provoking. The
> emphasis on areas of uncertainty, rather than definitive answers, seems to
> me to be a key step in designing meaningful human-machine collaboration.
>
> Your perspective on contingency indicators also got me thinking about a
> few possible extensions. One is organizational design: such indicators
> could be used not only in learning environments but also in real-time
> dashboards, helping leaders decide when to escalate issues to human debate
> and when automated processes are sufficient. Another is the parallel with
> law and politics, where “gray areas” of interpretation could benefit from
> such an indication to highlight where human deliberation is needed. In
> pedagogy, indicators of contingency could be embedded in simulations or
> case studies, prompting learners to think explicitly about where
> uncertainty lies and how to allocate expertise. Finally, your biological
> analogy is intriguing: if cells themselves operate with internal and
> external indicators of contingency, then perhaps management learning could
> take the form of a kind of “organizational metabolism” where uncertainty is
> not a disadvantage but a vital indicator of adaptation.
>
> I will be very interested to continue to follow how these ideas might
> connect cybernetics, information theory, and experimental learning design.
>
> ***
>
> Dear Emanuel ,
>
> I am sorry that you still feel offended that your article was not accepted
> for publication in an ITHEA journal. I remember this case because then as
> editor-in-chief I had to make the binding decision, as there was a serious
> dispute between the author and the reviewers. Below I will remind you of my
> opinion, which has not changed to this day. As can be seen from your
> letter, the problem with the title that I mention below was fixed by you.
> Your idea was published at the next IS4SI summit, so you achieve this goal.
>
> However, my essential remark regarding the definition of the concept of
> information remains valid to this day. Here is my opinion, which was the
> basis for my decision not to accept your article.
>
>
>
> 1. The title of the article — “The brain is processing information, not
> data: Does anybody knows about that?” — is problematic for a scientific
> journal. Rhetorical questions and colloquial phrases (“Does anybody knows
> about that?”) are not appropriate for academic publishing, where clarity,
> precision, and neutrality are expected. The scientific title should
> indicate the focus or hypothesis of the study. Here, the title resembles a
> polemical statement rather than a research statement, which undermines the
> credibility of the article.
>
>
>
> 2. The central definition – “Information is a linguistic description of
> structures observable in a given data set” – is both original and limiting.
>
> It correctly emphasizes that information is not identical with raw data
> and that meaning derives from the structured description. This distinction
> is valuable, especially when criticizing Shannon’s purely statistical
> concept.
>
> At the same time, this definition has a number of limitations.
>
> The definition reduces information to linguistic description, giving
> precedence to textual representation. This is too narrow, since information
> can be generated by images, sounds, gestures, and other nonverbal
> modalities.
>
> Human cognition is not entirely text-based. The left hemisphere of the
> brain is indeed associated with language processing, but the right
> hemisphere is crucial for visual, auditory, and spatial reasoning.
> Information should therefore be understood as encompassing symbolic,
> figurative, and embodied forms, not just linguistic ones.
>
> Nonhuman intelligence further challenges the definition. Animals such as
> chimpanzees, elephants, and dolphins demonstrate self-awareness (e.g.,
> passing the mirror test) and solve complex problems without relying on
> textual or linguistic systems. Their information processing is based on
> perception, memory, and social interaction, but not on verbal language.
>
>
>
> 3. By equating information with linguistic description, the article risks
> confusing semantic representation with information itself.
>
> Information can be encoded in mathematical models, visual diagrams,
> musical notation, or even tacit bodily knowledge.
>
> Limiting information to text ignores multimodal cognition and the
> diversity of representational systems across species.
>
>
>
> 4. A more comprehensive definition of information must recognize that it
> is neither uniquely human nor uniquely linguistic; it is a property of
> adaptive systems, biological and artificial.
>
>
>
> While your article raised important concerns about the conflation of data
> and information, its framework was weakened by an inappropriate title and
> an overly narrow definition.
>
> Insisting on linguistic description excludes vast areas of human and
> nonhuman cognition. A richer conception of information would integrate
> textual, figurative, and embodied forms, recognizing that meaning is not
> limited to words but emerges in multiple representational modalities.
>
> ***
>
> Dear Steve and Joseph,
>
> I would like to comment on autopoiesis and autopoietic systems. But that
> would be a relatively long text, which is better left in a separate letter.
> Therefore, I will return to these concepts later, as well as to Steve's
> article and book, which are interesting and debatable.
>
>
>
> With respect,
>
> Krassimir
>
>
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QfaOHb3zv9QAsz4KgNDHFYLZrAvJEY-M72aLlQ3C0a370zDIR-VbJnvoXHqFVcFxnpYSniZRDW2d1lX03aE$>
> Virus-free.www.avast.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QfaOHb3zv9QAsz4KgNDHFYLZrAvJEY-M72aLlQ3C0a370zDIR-VbJnvoXHqFVcFxnpYSniZRDW2d1lX03aE$>
> <#m_4983743765028022776_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at 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 
> ----------
>

-- 
Dr. Mark William Johnson
Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health
University of Manchester

Department of Science Education
University of Copenhagen

Department of Eye and Vision Science (honorary)
University of Liverpool
Phone: 07786 064505
Email: johnsonmwj1 at gmail.com
Blog: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S1RhwBL3UqgisQsK8lqIXVgrxuOVXOG5XDdQ7mSV5ouhUqkV-pg4BO_Nlm_-y7Ph5DuYsqRFwXeqXHsxkV-_IYs$ 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20251130/8a0b7abd/attachment.html>