Re: Information and Natural Languages

From: Rafael Capurro, Professor <[email protected]>
Date: Mon 08 Dec 1997 - 18:47:32 CET

Dear Koichiro,

let us begin our dialogue now! Is it information that is 'out there'
or is it our (!) way of being, to be 'out there'? What does it mean
'out there'? If there is 'objective information' it does not know
nothing (as far as we now) from its being 'out there'. In other
words, the condition of possibility of saying something is 'out
there' is that the one who says 'out there' knows the difference (and
makes this difference explicit) between being 'out there' and being
'inside'. But in order to makes this difference one has to go (to be)
 beyond it, as it could never be possible to think about an 'out there' just from
an 'inside' that is not known as such (!). (Western) Philosophy has
been asking itself for centuries about the possibility of the 'out
there' and the question of a bridge (quaestio de ponte) between
'there' and 'here'. In other words, information is 'out there' as far
as everything has the possibility (!) for us (!) of being out there.
The possibility of saying (!) something is 'out there' is a
possibility given to us through language, as far as we can say:
something 'is' (or 'is not'), and to broad-cast our 'casting'. This
thesis seems to be an idealistic or anthropomorphic thesis
(everything is 'dependent' on us), but it looks only so. It concerns
only the way(s) we say things are (or the ways we 'constitute' or
'construct' things), not their being 'independent of the knower'
(that is again a sentence, and as such it says something about the
way we see 'reality'). As far as I can see, your question has also to
do with two interesting subject matters: what does it mean to
'broadcast' a message? We need, I think, something we could call a
theory of messages. And the second point is, what does it mean to
talk about information in the present tense and in the present
progressive tense. This last question concerns the relationship
between message transmission and time. When talking about information
without making the (human) difference between past, present and
future, we get a specific form of information (or message)
transmission. As you say, now journal would admit to be used as a
broadcasting agency. This means, we have different ways of
broadcasting messages, and different ways of relating them to time.
Kind regards, Sayonara
Rafael

Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 05:42:05 +0100 (MET)
Reply-to: fis@listas.unizar.es
From: koichiro matsuno/7129 <kmatsuno@vos.nagaokaut.ac.jp>
To: Multiple recipients of list <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Subject: Information and Natural Languages

   In this first posting of mine to fis@listas.unizar.es,
I want to raise one point related to the issue of information
and invite any comments on it from our colleagues on the net.
That is about the relationship between what information is
all about and the capacity of our natural languages for the
job.

   If information is something out there, one might be able
to talk about it in the mode of the present tense. Shannon's
information could be quite satisfactory for the purpose
because of its objectification in the form of information
bits. On the other hand, if information is related to some
process in progress, the corresponding linguistic vehicle
must be in the mode of the present progressive tense. However,
statements in the present progressive tense are extremely
hard to be objectified in the usual sense of practicing
sciences. No refereed journal would accept papers written
exclusively in the present progressive tense. A live
broadcasting of whatever game in the field from one station
cannot claim its objectivity, because it may quite likely
collide with similar live broadcastings of the same game
from other stations. At issue is how to reach the present
tense (to be objectified) from the present progressive
tense (in the mode of a live broadcasting).

   Of course, Shannon's information is a legitimate
enterprise on information practiced in the present tense.
If there is one more legitimate attempt for the matter of
information, that might be to precipitate the present tense
from the present progressive tense. How about its
likelihood?

   Koichiro Matsuno
Received on Mon Dec 8 18:48:36 1997

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon 07 Mar 2005 - 10:24:45 CET