A View from the Inside

   Let me comprehend some of what Jerry, Pedro and Werner
said so far, to the extent I can.

   Jerry's position is very clear in the statement:

>The problem becomes how to define the interrelationships
>between structures of different degrees of organization -
>such as an atom, a cell, a human being and a social
>system.
 
This remark is relevant to Werner's position:

>the chemicals convert into "life" only at the moment when
>information-processing starts.

The contrast between Jerry's and Werner's invites Pedro's
tough question:

>one of the underlying most serious conflicts I see in
>between info and the physical concept of "state".

   A picture of information that seems to emerge from these
observations is that it is about a relationship between
"something" and "something-else". If we are confident about
what that "something" is, its state description should be
legitimate and structured. This has been what physicists have
successfully done so far. Moreover, if we claim we are
further sure about what that complex of something and all
the rest looks like, the state description would suffice
and there should be no need to refer to information. That is
the view from nowhere (a la Nagel).

   On the other hand, once we admit that there is no viewpoint
that could integrate both that something and something-else,
state description, that has been a favorite to many
physicists, could not be tenable to that complex anymore.
Information is always about a view from somewhere. It is
methodologically untenable for the adherent to that view to
tell where that somewhere is located. By saying this, I see
physics loses nothing. Information gains something, instead.
Information-processing is about a negotiation between each
view from anywhere.

   Regards,
   Koichrio

     Koichiro Matsuno
  
 
Received on Sat Jan 24 10:24:55 1998