Cari colleghi, l'esistenza implica la conoscenza articolata nelle diverse scienze della natura, umane e sociali. Quindi la "Science of Logic" , non la logica della scienza, di Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1812-1816) vale per qualsiasi tipo di scienza. Difatti la scienza pura della ragione si divide in tre dottrine: - dell'essere (quantità, qualità e misura); - dell'essenza, che studia il pensiero nella sua riflessione o mediazione, cioè il concetto in quanto è "per sè" e dunque appare; - del concetto, che studia il concetto "in sè e per sè". Il primo presentarsi della realtà avviene nelle forme immediate, intuitive, della qualità, quantità e misura, ma bisogna cogliere ciò che è all'origine nascosto nella realtà dell'essere: l'essenza che rappresenta la "verità dell'essere". La rilettura di Hegel fornisce i fondamenti ontologici al(la teoria del) valore economica concepita come una combinazione o una relazione energia/informazione basata sulla dialettica quantità/qualità e sulla "quantità qualitativa" o misura. Hegel non contrappone la quantità alla qualità, ma tenta di coglierne la complementarità facendo derivare la prima dalla seconda. La quantità è la negazione della qualità. Quantità e qualità variano continuamente, sono caratterizzate dalla variabilità, ma la variazione quantitativa è indifferente nei confronti della qualità che non cambia al mutare della dimensione quantitativa. Se la quantità è un momento di esteriorità indifferente alla sfera della qualità si giustifica o spiega la scarsa consi derazione di Hegel per le trattazioni puramente quantitative e dunque per quelle scienze matematiche quantitative o dure. Egli ritiene che le proposizioni della geometria e dell'aritmetica abbiano una natura esclusivamente analitica e dunque tautologica, negando loro ogni efficacia euristica. Questa forte critica al rigore e alla validità scientifica dei modelli matematici non gli impedisce di svolgere un'analisi che evidenzia l'insufficienza delle determinazioni, quantitative per la stessa matematica nella quale, secondo questa impostazione filosofica che influenza fortemente l'epistemologia scientifica, irrompono criteri qualitativi facendola divenire "dolce". Se la matematica è costretta incorporare criteri qualitativi o ordinali, deve far proprio il passaggio alla sfera della misura o "quantità qualitativa". Beninteso, la scienza della logica mi è servita per elaborare la Nuova economia (Cfr. in particolare Rizzo F., "La scienza non può non essere umana, civile, sociale, economi(c)a, enigmatica, nobile, profetica", Aracne, Roma, 2016, pp. 604-615; oppure Rizzo F., "La città dell'uomo. Sottesa dalla fede", in Human Rights and The City Crisis a cura di Corrado Beguinot ed altri, Giannini, Napoli, 2012). Quindi, per farla breve, "quantità qualitativa", "emo-ra-zionalità" e "significazione, informazione, comunicazione" sono fondamentali per l'INTERA conoscenza. Chiedo scusa per essermi dilungato e vi ringrazio anticipatamente per la vostra attenzione critica. Francesco.
2017-11-19 6:34 GMT+01:00 Xueshan Yan <y...@pku.edu.cn>: > Dear Terry and Loet， > > I think both of your posts put forward a very important concept to > information studies, i.e., HIERARCHY. > > Terry stated: "Communication needs to be more carefully distinguished from > mere transfer of physical differences, …… Any transfer of physical, > physical differences in this respect can be utilized to communicate, and > all communication requires this physical foundation." > > I hope to raise a similar question: what is the mode of the existence of > information? My answer is: No information can exist in a bare way. That is > to say, any existence of information is premised on the existence of > substrate, and the substrate can be hierarchical. In the same way, no > information can be communicated or processed in a bare way if and only if > it has been embedded in the substrate. In human information, substrate can > be divided into sign, paper, etc., or other electronic devices. In genetic > information, substrate can be divided into base, DNA or RNA, chromosome, > cell, and organism. The study about the mode of existence of information is > an important aspect of ontological research of information science. > > In Terry’s statement: "Simply collapsing our concept (compression, > collapse) of 'communication' to its physical substrate ……", or in Loet’s > words: "One should not confuse communication with the substance of > communication." Again, this is a hierarchy problem. Because no information > can be communicated in a bare way, so the communication of information is > premised on the communication of substrate, the same is true in the > processing of information. Then, any communication of information is > twofold: communication of information and communication of substrate. The > study about the mode of communication and processing of information is the > important aspect of dynamical research of information science. > > > > Best wishes, > > Xueshan > > > > *From:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] > *On Behalf Of *Loet Leydesdorff > *Sent:* Saturday, November 18, 2017 4:19 PM > *To:* Terrence W. DEACON <dea...@berkeley.edu>; fis <fis@listas.unizar.es> > *Subject:* Re: [Fis] some notes > > > > Dear Terry and colleagues, > > > > I agree that one should not confuse communication with the substance of > communication (e.g., life in bio-semiotics). It seems useful to me to > distinguish between several concepts of "communication". > > > > 1. Shannon's (1948) definitions in "The Mathematical Theory of > Communication". Information is communicated, but is yet meaning free. These > notions of information and communication are counter-intuitive (Weaver, > 1949). However, they provide us with means for the measurement, such as > bits of information. The meaning of the communication is provided by the > system of reference (Theil, 1972); in other words, by the specification of > "what is comunicated?" For example, if money is communicated > (redistributed), the system of reference is a transaction system. If > molecules are communicated, life can be generated (Maturana). > > > > 2. Information as "a difference which makes a difference" (Bateson, 1973; > McKay, 1969). A difference can only make a difference for a receiving > system that provides meaning to the system. In my opinion, one should in > this case talk about "meaningful information" and "meaningful > communication" as different from the Shannon-type information (based on > probability distributions). In this case, we don't have a clear instrument > for the measurement. For this reason, I have a preference for the > definitions under 1. > > > > 3. Interhuman communication is of a different order because it involves > intentionality and language. The discourses under 1. and 2. are interhuman > communication systems. (One has to distinguish levels and should not impose > our intuitive notion of communication on the processes under study.) In my > opinion, interhuman communication involves both communication of > information and possibilities of sharing meaning. > > > > The Shannon-type information shares with physics the notion of entropy. > However, physical entropy is dimensioned (Joule/Kelvin; S = k(B) H), > whereas probabilistic entropy is dimensionless (H). Classical physics, for > example, is based on the communication of momenta and energy because these > two quantities have to be conserved. In the 17th century, it was common to > use the word "communication" in this context (Leibniz). > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > > From: "Terrence W. DEACON" <dea...@berkeley.edu> > > To: "fis" <fis@listas.unizar.es> > > Cc: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>; "Loet Leydesdorff" < > l...@leydesdorff.net> > > Sent: 11/17/2017 6:34:18 PM > > Subject: Re: [Fis] some notes > > > > On communication: > > > > "Communication" needs to be more carefully distinguished from mere > > transfer of physical differences from location to location and time to > > time. Indeed, any physical transfer of physical differences in this > > respect can be utilized to communicate, and all communication requires > > this physical foundation. But there is an important hierarchic > > distinction that we need to consider. Simply collapsing our concept of > > 'communication' to its physical substrate (and ignoring the process of > > interpretation) has the consequence of treating nearly all physical > > processes as communication and failing to distinguish those that > > additionally convey something we might call representational content. > > > > Thus while internet communication and signals transferred between > > computers do indeed play an essential role in human communication, we > > only have to imagine a science fiction story in which all human > > interpreters suddenly disappear but our computers nevertheless > > continue to exchange signals, to realize that those signals are not > > "communicating" anything. At that point they would only be physically > > modifying one another, not communicating, except in a sort of > > metaphoric sense. This sort of process would not be fundamentally > > different from solar radiation modifying atoms in the upper atmosphere > > or any other similar causal process. It would be odd to say that the > > sun is thereby communicating anything to the atmosphere. > > > > So, while I recognize that there are many methodological contexts in > > which it makes little difference whether or not we ignore this > > semiotic aspect, as many others have also hinted, this is merely to > > bracket from consideration what really distinguishes physical transfer > > of causal influence from communication. Remember that this was a > > methodological strategy that even Shannon was quick to acknowledge in > > the first lines of his classic paper. We should endeavor to always be > > as careful. > > > > — Terry > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > >
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
