At 07:45 AM 10/6/2014, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
"Information" in Peircean logic is defined as the logical product of
the breadth and depth of a sign; these are logical quantities and
cannot be measured in bits.
HP: I do not understand a "quantity" that has no measure of some
kind. If not informati
l for purposes of semiotic analysis.
We can't understand Dicisigns as "informational signs" or
"quasi-propositions" (EP2:275) without using the semiotic concept of
"information".
gary f.
From: Howard Pattee [mailto:hpat...@roadrunner.com]
Sent: 5-Oct-14
At 06:41 PM 10/5/2014, Clark Goble wrote:
The type/token distinction seems definitely to apply here
[Pattee-Fuhrman disagreement].
HP: I agree. Bits are ambiguous. Bit may refer to a measure or type
of information, or bit may refer to a token of information, like 0 or 1.
Howard
---
> On Oct 5, 2014, at 2:20 PM, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
>
> HP: Suppose, in context of a Dicisign or a proposition, you ask me:
> Is it true or false? I can give you a one-bit answer. Isn't that bit some
> kind of sign?
>
> GF: My answer to your question is: 1. (as opposed to 0).
> But without the
