<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=gb2312" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=΢ÈíÑźÚ>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4><SPAN
lang=EN-US><FONT face="Times New Roman">Dear colleagues</FONT></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: ËÎÌå; mso-ascii-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-hansi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'">£¬</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p><FONT
size=4 face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman">Due to the limit of two posts every week, Rafael, Joseph,
and I had a farther off-<SPAN class=593440203-23062015>line </SPAN>discussion
about the relationship between ¡°It from bit¡± and some classic Chinese thoughts.
In fact, the deep dialogue between them two made me a bystander. But I still
want to exposit them here as an inspiration, especially for those who have the
consideration about east thoughts. From the experience of thousands and
thousands of research about <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Yi Ching</I>
and <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Tao Te Ching</I>, my impression is:
It is imposable for us to have the answer to ¡°It from bit¡± within the next 20
years, including physicists and information scientists.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p><FONT
size=4 face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p><FONT
size=4 face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman">Best wishes,</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><o:p><FONT
size=4 face="Times New Roman"></FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman">Xueshan</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman">1<SPAN class=593440203-23062015>1</SPAN>:<SPAN
class=593440203-23062015>04</SPAN>, June 23, 2015</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=4
face="Times New Roman">Peking University</FONT></SPAN></P></FONT></DIV><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=zh-cn class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> Joseph Brenner
[mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:26
PM<BR><B>To:</B> rafael@capurro.de; yxs@pku.edu.cn<BR><B>Subject:</B>
It-from-Bit and the TAO<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>Dear
Rafael,<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>This is
getting back to work with a vengeance! Your note is so dense that I have
expanded it and will comment bit-by-bit (sic), in order to find my ¡®place¡¯ in
it:<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>1. I
understand 'it from bit' indeed as today's pervasive interpretation of Being
from a computational perspective. This does not mean that I believe that being
is computation or that 'it' _is_ 'bit' but that this is the perspective or the
spirit of time (Zeitgeist).<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: This is certainly correct. However, it does not need to be and is
not <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">my
</I>perspective.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>2. It is an
epistemological perspective, and less, I think, a metaphysical one in the sense
that someone can believe (in a new form of Pythagoreanism) that the universe (a
large 'object' isn't it?) is 'made of bits' or even as in the case of the
Platonist Floridi: of 'forms' (in Modernity: of 'laws'). But... yes, there might
be computationally oriented scientists that believe that this is the true
'perspective' in order to understand reality: to see it only (!) from a
computational perspective. <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: I am, therefore, justified in resisting such people who push it as
an ontological reality. <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>3.
Biologists in the FIS group feel that this does not meet the phenomenon biology
deals with (life) and so also some physicists that feel that matter or energy
are not to be reduced to 'bits' etc. <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: I agree. Matter-energy is not to be reduced to bits in the
computational sense.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>4. There is
then, in my view, a misunderstanding when 'it from bit' is not understood as an
ontological (epistemological in fact if we do not take the Heideggerian
terminology for 'ontology' in the sense of an understanding (!) of Being)
perspective. <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: Rephrasing for clarity: we have understanding when it-from-bit is
understood 1) as a non-compuational ontological perspective and 2)
epistemological in fact, excluding for the moment the specific H. terminology of
ontology (only) as an understanding of Being.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>5. But in
order to understand this possibility (or to understand it from bit as today's
pervading Zeitgeist), it is necessary to state the question of Being (as
Heidegger and others did...) and to leave the answer(s) to this question (there
are several of them in history... ) open instead of fixing it like metaphysics
tries again and again with different 'terms' (idea, matter, energy, etc.).
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: I can understand this possibility both 1) as stated and 2) as
today¡¯s pervading <EM>Zeitgeist </EM>(but not mine)<EM>. </EM>However, I note
that what ¡®metaphysics¡¯ tries to do with terms like matter-energy does not <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">ipso facto </I>empty them of reference to
reality. There is a ¡®third¡¯ way which I have tried to express in my suggestion
of the ¡°naturalization of Capurro¡± (Xueshan: my view of Rafael¡¯s work).
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>6. It is in
this sense, <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">i.e.</I> relativizing the
metaphysical aspirations of 'it from bit' that I see that the Chinese view of
information _as_ a new term for DAO could be promising.
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: YES! This is where your historical perspective is absolutely
essential. <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT size=4>7. But
then, we are leaving the realm of science which is always related to a
particular being (regional ontologies as Husserl called them) and we take a leap
towards a previous _horizon_ where such 'regional ontologies' are possible. This
leap is, I think, what DAO means.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>JEB: NO! Please see my answer to Point 5. I believe the concept of the
realm of science is not as limited as you seem to indicate here in
view, among other things, of the convergence of science and philosophy
under the influence of information. In this convergence, as in other emergent
processes following the LIR Principle of Dynamic Opposition, the two domains do
not lose their specificities. Look at the effort I have to make to respond to
those who accuse <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">me</I>, of all people,
of being unscientific!<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT
size=4><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold">To
repeat, </SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: maroon"><STRONG>there is and can be no
opposition between the DAO and science. There is therefore no ¡®leap¡¯
(backwards?) to be made since science, non-science and our understanding of them
are all part of the DAO. (Also our non-understanding).</STRONG></SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"> <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>My conclusion is that the ¡®language¡¯ used by Chinese thinkers to discuss
these matters has (at least) one major advantage over others: it forces one to
think beyond static conceptions of reality towards <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">relational non-separable, non-regional</I>
ontologies that have in fact the needed affinity to both modern physics and
digital ontologies. My Logic in Reality is consistent with such ontologies and
indicates aspects of their dynamics. As I have been discussing with Loet
Leydesdorff, people differ in their capacity to perceive such reality, or
reality-as-such, as much as they differ in their general intelligence. I
personally have no difficulty in accepting that some people have a much greater
ability than I do to see complex relationships at high levels of reality. Such
phenomena must be considered as part of science.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>Hoping not to have lost your attention and for comments in due
course,<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>All the best,<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><o:p><FONT
size=4> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: maroon; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold"><FONT
size=4>Joseph<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rafael@capurro.de href="mailto:rafael@capurro.de">Rafael Capurro</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=joe.brenner@bluewin.ch
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch">Joseph Brenner</A> ; <A
title=yxs@pku.edu.cn href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn">yxs@pku.edu.cn</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 17, 2015 7:55
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Wheeler's
'Enlightenment'?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=moz-cite-prefix><FONT size=4>Joseph<BR><BR>I understand 'it from
bit' indeed as today's pervasive interpretion of Being from a computational
perspective. This does not mean that I believe that being is computation or
that 'it' _is_ 'bit' but that this is the perspective or the spirit of time
(Zeitgeist). It is an expistemological perspective, and less, I think,
an metaphysical one in the sense that someone can believe (in a new form of
Pythagoreism) that the universe (a large 'object' isn't it?) is 'made of bits'
or even as in the case of the Platonist Floridi: of 'forms' (in Modernity: of
'laws'). But... yes, there might be computational oriented scientist that
believe that this is the true 'perspective' in order to understand reality: to
see it only (!) from a computational perspective. Biologists in the FIS group,
feel that this does not meet the phenomenon biology deals with (life) and so
also some physicist that feels that matter or energy are not to be reduced to
'bits' etc. There is then, in my view, a misunderstanding when 'it from bit'
is not understood as an ontological (epistemological in fact if we do not take
the Heideggerian terminology for 'ontology' in the sense of an understanding
(!) of Being) perspetive. But in order to understand this possibility (or to
understand it from bit as today's pervaiding Zeitgeist), it is necessary to
state the question of Being (as Heidegger and others did...) and to to leave
the answer(s) to this question (there are several of them in history... ) open
instead of fixing it like metaphysics tries again and again with different
'terms' (idea, matter, energy, etc.). It is in this sense, i.e. relativizing
the metaphysical aspirations of 'it from bit' that I see that the Chinese view
of information _as_ a new term for DAO could be promising. But then, we are
leaving the realm of science which is always related to a particular being
(regional ontologies as Husserl called them) and we take a leap towards a
previous _horizon_ possibilitating such 'regional ontologies'. This leap is, I
think, what DAO means.<BR><BR>best<BR>Rafael<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:7E95E2E462DE423EA633A68DD496A05F@PCdeJoseph
type="cite"><META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 6.00.6002.19383">
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Dear Xueshan and Rafael,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>If you, by the term 'Bit', imply something that
is open, active, and fertile like Nothing, then It-from-Bit is not incorrect
buts adds nothing to the original insight.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>The difficulty is that people like Lloyd,
Tegmark and others who use the term bit see it in its meaning as 'binary
digit', and they wish to ground the universe (I think) on this rather
weak computational base. There is no life or basis of life in the inert
abstractions of 0 and 1, only the basis for calculation. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>My conclusion (tentative, of
course): It-from-Bit theory in its standard form is a reduced version
of ancient understandings that need to be brought into modern form.
However, this must be done without, literally and figuratively, denaturing
them. </FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Comments welcome,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Best,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Joseph</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=yxs@pku.edu.cn href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn"
moz-do-not-send="true">Xueshan Yan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=joe.brenner@bluewin.ch
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch" moz-do-not-send="true">'Joseph
Brenner'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=rafael@capurro.de
href="mailto:rafael@capurro.de" moz-do-not-send="true">'Rafael
Capurro'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 17, 2015 11:42
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Fis] It from Bit redux
. . . Loss of Information. OFF-LINE</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT
face=Arial>Dear Joseph,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT face=Arial>I
have two notes already this week too.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT
face=Arial>Yes, to my knowledge, those Chinese physicists who have close
relationship with Wheeler are very familiar with Yi Jing and Tao Te Ching.
According to our opinion, Chinese word "Nothing" is very close to the
"Bit". As you know, as the supervisor of Wheeler, Bohr is very
enthusiastic to Yi Jing and Tao Te Ching, especially Yin-Yang Fish and
Taiji Diagram.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT face=Arial>It
is a pity, the mentioned two books of Shen's ¡°Informatilism" and Wang's
¡°Unified Information Theory" are all in Chinese.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT face=Arial>I
think both of you and Rafael may have the deep thinking about ancient
Chinese thoughts, thank you!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT size=2
face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-US></SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT size=2
face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-US></SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT size=2><SPAN
lang=EN-US>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT face=Arial><FONT
size=3>Xueshan<O:P></O:P></FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT face=Arial><FONT
size=3>1<SPAN class=515533808-17062015>7</SPAN>:<SPAN
class=515533808-17062015>41</SPAN>, June 1<SPAN
class=515533808-17062015>7</SPAN>,
2015<O:P></O:P></FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><FONT size=3 face=Arial>Peking
University</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=515533808-17062015><FONT size=2
face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-US></SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=zh-cn class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> Joseph Brenner [<A
class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch">mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch</A>]
<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 17, 2015 4:30 PM<BR><B>To:</B> <A
class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated
href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn">yxs@pku.edu.cn</A><BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[Fis] It from Bit redux . . . Loss of Information.
OFF-LINE<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Dear Xueshan,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I have posted two notes already this week but
want to thank you now for your important note. I am somewhat aware
of, (not 'familar' with), the Yi Jing and the Tao Te Ching. They are
relevant of course to the current discussion, and in my opinion in
similar ways. One might summarize the situation by saying that if you
believe that a section of the Yi Jing applies to you exactly you
are lost; ("if you do not believe it you are lost"). For the Tao, if one
cannot accept a statement like "The Tao that can be discussed is not
the Tao", one is lost. And did Wheeler understand what he heard about
'nothing'?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>You can perhaps see why I have reacted as I
have to people who keep asking (the term is mild) for 'exactitude' in
relation to information and life.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>In this connection, I would like to know if
English versions or summaries of the work of Shen and Wang to which you
referred are available.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Thank you and best wishes,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Joseph</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial> </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=yxs@pku.edu.cn href="mailto:yxs@pku.edu.cn"
moz-do-not-send="true">Xueshan Yan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=joe.brenner@bluewin.ch
href="mailto:joe.brenner@bluewin.ch" moz-do-not-send="true">'Joseph
Brenner'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=fis@listas.unizar.es
href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es"
moz-do-not-send="true">fis@listas.unizar.es</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, June 16, 2015 9:14
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Fis] It from Bit
redux . . . Loss of Information</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>Dear
Pedro, Joseph, John, Krassimir, Rafael, and All,</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>Here I
tell you some interesting stories about ¡°It from Bit¡± in
China.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>Around
the year of 2000, The Seminar of Interdisciplinary Information Science
of Peking University came into contact for the first time with Wheeler¡¯s
¡°It from Bit¡±, in fact, <SPAN class=class7>earlier</SPAN><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial> this theory</SPAN>, we had just discussed
Stonier¡¯s ¡°Information Physics¡± and had consulted with the Dean of
Physics School, his opinion was: The concept ENTROPY is enough to
physics, <SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>it is </SPAN><SPAN
class=class5>unnecessary</SPAN> to <SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>blunder
in the fashion of information for </SPAN><SPAN
class=class5>physicists</SPAN><SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>. Of course,
t</SPAN><SPAN class=class1>hat</SPAN><SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>
</SPAN><SPAN class=class2>was</SPAN><SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial> over
</SPAN><SPAN class=class3>fifteen</SPAN><SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>
</SPAN><SPAN class=class4>years</SPAN><SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>
</SPAN><SPAN class=class5>ago.</SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>We </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
class=class2><SPAN lang=EN-US>afterwards had been </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>tracking this information
problem in Science of China History; So far, we found there are at least
four doctrines related to </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US>¡°It from
Bit¡±.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>1. It
from Taiji.<SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial> Zhou Wenwang (Ji Chang), see
his book: ¡°The Book of Changes</SPAN>¡±<SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>
(Yijing or Zhouyi),</SPAN> B.C. 1050;</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>2. It from Dao. Laozi. see his
book: ¡°Tao Te Ching¡± (Daodejing), </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US>B.C.
500;<SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial><O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>3. The world is composed of
information. Xinxi Shen, see his book: ¡°</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
lang=EN-US>Informatilism¡±, 2005;</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>4. <SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial>The world is informational. Jianghuo Wang, see
his book: ¡°Unified Information Theory¡±,
2012.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>To my knowledge, the last two
authors had not </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US>contacted Wheeler¡¯s ¡°It
from Bit¡±, that <SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>Ji Chang</SPAN> and <SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial>Laozi</SPAN> had no contacted with it is very
obvious.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-US>In all
his lifetime, Wheeler once visited China only one time in </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: windowtext" lang=EN-US>1981</SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US>, when
he stayed in China, he watched a Beijing Opera named ¡°Feng Ming Qi
Shan¡±. When a general hold a flag on which a large Chinese word
appeared, he asked the accompany that what is the meaning of that word,
they told him its meaning is NOTHING, he said excitedly: The answer what
I am looking for <SPAN class=class3>desperately</SPAN> all my life about
the physical reality, your ancestors had originally given thousands
years ago. (<SPAN class=stcentxtfontarial>see his book:</SPAN>
¡°Wheeler¡¯s Lectures on Physics and Austerity¡±, 1982).</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>So far, on the argument of
</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-US>¡°It from Bit¡±<SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial>, we can not prove it is correct, but can
not prove it is<SPAN class=750215406-16062015> </SPAN>wrong
too.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>Best
wishes,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US></SPAN></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN
lang=EN-US>Xueshan<O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>1<SPAN
class=750215406-16062015>5</SPAN>:<SPAN
class=750215406-16062015>13</SPAN>, June 16,
2015<O:P></O:P></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US>Peking
University</SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
class=stcentxtfontarial><SPAN lang=EN-US><SPAN
class=750215406-16062015></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal>Fis mailing list<BR><A
class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</A><BR><A
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</A></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><PRE class=moz-signature cols="72">--
Prof.em. Dr. Rafael Capurro
Hochschule der Medien (HdM), Stuttgart, Germany
Capurro Fiek Foundation for Information Ethics (<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.capurro-fiek-foundation.org">http://www.capurro-fiek-foundation.org</A>)
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) (<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://icie.zkm.de">http://icie.zkm.de</A>)
Editor in Chief, International Review of Information Ethics (IRIE) (<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.i-r-i-e.net">http://www.i-r-i-e.net</A>)
Postal Address: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
E-Mail: <A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:rafael@capurro.de">rafael@capurro.de</A>
Voice: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
Homepage: <A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="http://www.capurro.de">www.capurro.de</A>
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>