Caro Gordana, grazie per l'apprezzamento del mio messaggio. Messaggio che in sintesi significa questo: il pensiero esposto è quello di Hegel; la quantità qualitativa è fondamentale per la Nuova economia che ho elaborato; non considero la matematica una scienza quantitativa; ho discusso di queste cose con Enrico Bombieri, il più grande teorico dei numeri vivente; soprattutto abbiamo parlato della funzione d'onda di B. Riemann; il penultimo rigo è molto importante. Io non sono un matematico, ma assegno alla matematica una funzione importante e insostituibile. Nonostante la mia ignoranza di "poverino esponenziale", sono molto interessato al rapporto che passa tra i numeri primi, la funzione d'onda di Riemann, la meccanica quantistica e i numeri primi o complessi. Un abbraccio affettuoso. Francesco.
2017-11-19 9:00 GMT+01:00 Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic < gordana.dodig-crnko...@mdh.se>: > Dear Francesco, > Thank you so much for your enlightening post on logic that is rising the > topic one level up. > You refer to Hegel who recognised complementary relationship between > quality, quantity and their synthesis – measure, which is very central for > the current discussion. > I made English translation of your mail (below) and I hope it is adequate > enough. > > However, in your mail, if I understand it correctly, and in the rest of > the current discussion, it is assumed that *mathematics is quantitative > science.* > As we are in the beginning of the era of big data that makes people > believe that “data speak for themselves” and that sciences just collect > and summarise/systematically represent data, it is very important to > point out that mathematics is much, much more than data and its processing. > It is qualitative science in the same sense that logic is. Algebra is not > quantitative science. Algebra is the study of mathematical symbols and > the rules for manipulating these symbols. Topology is not quantitative > science. Topology is the study of qualitative properties of topological > spaces that are invariant under certain kinds of transformations. > > Here is an explanation why it is essential not to identify quantitative > literacy with mathematics. > https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/qr/qr_and_the_disciplines.html > > All the best, > Gordana > > > > *From: *Fis <fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es> on behalf of Francesco Rizzo < > 13francesco.ri...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 07:56 > *To: *"y...@pku.edu.cn" <y...@pku.edu.cn> > *Cc: *FIS Group <fis@listas.unizar.es> > *Subject: *Re: [Fis] some notes > > > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > existence implies articulate knowledge in the various sciences of nature, > human and social. So the "Science of Logic", not the logic of science, by > Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1812-1816) applies to any kind of science. > In fact, pure science of reason is divided into three doctrines of: > - *being* (quantity, quality and their unity - measure) > https://www.marxistsfr.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/sl/slbeing.htm; > - *essence*, which studies thought in its reflection or mediation, that > is, the concept as it is "per se" and thus appears; > - *concept*, study of the concept "in itself and for itself". > The first presentation of reality takes place in the immediate, intuitive > forms of quality, quantity and measure, but one must grasp what is hidden > origin in the reality of being: the essence that represents the "truth of > being". > > Hegel's reinterpretation provides ontological foundations to (the theory > of) economic value conceived as a combination or energy / information > relationship based on dialectical quantity / quality and "qualitative > quantity" or measure. Hegel does not contrast the quantity with quality, > but tries to gain complementarity by deriving the first from the second. > Quantity is the denial of quality. Quantity and quality vary continuously, > they are characterized by variability, but quantitative variation is > indifferent to the quality that does not change with the change in the > quantitative dimension. If the quantity is a time of outwardness > indifferent to the sphere of quality, it justifies or explains Hegel's > lack of consideration for purely quantitative considerations and therefore > for those quantitative or hard mathematical sciences. He believes that > the propositions of geometry and arithmetic have an exclusively analytical > and therefore tautological nature, denying them all heuristic efficacy. > This strong criticism of the rigor and scientific validity of mathematical > models does not prevent him from carrying out an analysis that highlights > the inadequacy of determinations, > quantitative for the same mathematics, in which, according to this > philosophical approach that strongly influences scientific epistemology, it > raises qualitative criteria making it become "sweet." If maths are forced > to incorporate qualitative or ordinal criteria, they have to move to the > sphere of measure or "qualitative quantity". > Of course, the science of logic has served me to elaborate the New Economy > (see in particular Rizzo F., "Science can not be human, civil, social, > economics (c), enigmatic, noble, prophetic", Aracne , Rome, 2016, pp. > 604-615; or Rizzo F., "The City of Man, Subordinated to Faith", in Human > Rights and the City Crisis by Corrado Beguinot et al., Giannini, Naples, > 2012). > So, to make it short, "qualitative quantity", "emo-rationality" and > "meaning, information, communication" are fundamental to the whole of > knowledge. > I apologize for being overdue and thank you in advance for your critical > attention. > Francis. > > > > From: Fis <fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es> on behalf of Francesco Rizzo < > 13francesco.ri...@gmail.com> > Date: Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 07:56 > To: "y...@pku.edu.cn" <y...@pku.edu.cn> > Cc: FIS Group <fis@listas.unizar.es> > > Subject: Re: [Fis] some notes > > 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
