Re: Biology, technology and information

From: Rafael Capurro, Professor <[email protected]>
Date: Sat 14 Mar 1998 - 22:56:00 CET

Dear Jerry,

thank you for your comments. Just some ideas on them:
1) As I was considering the difference between:
"Information is a difference which makes a difference" (Bateson)
and
"Information is a difference which finds a difference" (Luhmann)
I was having in mind a very good article by Qvotrup published in
Soerens Journal Cybernetics, where he (Qvortrup) establishes a
difference between thinking about information whithin the natural
sciences (first definition) and withing psychic and social systems
(second definition).
This double-side (maybe double-bind) structure of the concept of
information is clearly stated by Weizsaecker (in different epochs of
his writings). The key point is, I think, to question the idea that
information is something "out there", "objective" (a "thing" that can
be transported from A to B). The classic situation is the one given
by a knower, for whom something is (becomes) information with
relation to (!) his/her knowledge structure. Weizsaecker says, that
we can 'in a certain sense' (!) consider living (and non-living)
structuress as a basis for something to become information (to make a
difference) (or not). But he states, at the same time, that this
process of attributing something to a structure as its information is
being on a knowledge basis (we are grasping the difference as such).
This last insight is, philosophically speaking, a transcendental
(Kantian) argumentation, i.e. it sound profoundly idealistic from the
viewpoint of natural science! Weizsaecker argues also as a Platonist
by considering the possibility of 'forms in themselves' (ideas), but
he states that our point of view is (in contrast to Plato's) a
dynamic (evolutionary) one and a saecular one (non-divine).
2) Some 20 years ago I made an etymological and historical
investigation on the word/concept of information (published by Saur
Verlag Munich, but not available any more). I was guided to this
investigation by Weizsaecker's hint, that the concept of information
is a new (modern) way of thinking about the Platonic and Aristotelian
concepts of idea, eidos, morphe, which are at the basis of Western
Philosophy (and science). I found out, that the Latin word
'informatio' as used for instance by Cicero and later on by thinkers
like Augustine and through the Middle Ages (Thomas Aquinas etc.) was
basically connected to ontological and epistemological texts of
Platon and Aristotle concerning Eidos/Idea/Morphe/Typos. It was used
in the sense of 'giving a form' (a difference that makes a
difference!) as well as 'giving a form to the soul' (finding a
difference), and both processes were intimately related. The word
lost in Modernity (since ca. the 16th century, entering into French,
English, Spanish) its ontological meaning and retained (until now!)
the epistemological meaning of: giving knowledge to someone. Why did
it lost its ontological meaning (which is having now a renaissance
for instance in this forum)? My hypothesis is, that Modernity
questioned Scholastic philosophy and ontology and with this
questioning also the concept of 'giving form'. There are interesting
text from Descartes, where you can see use of the term which is
sometimes scholastic some times almost telematic!
Shannon and Weaver, by puting aside the semantic and pragmatic
aspects of the concept, provoked a naturalization of information and
gave rise to our present thinking.
Well this is in a very (!) short way, what I can tell you about it.
One last remark. I asked myself many years what was the corresponding
concept (!) (not the word) for our anthropological sense of
information in ancient Greek. It was supposed to be 'logos'... But I
found out, that 'angelia' (message) is a much better 'trans-lation'.
This is a fascinating area of research, given the dominance of
'messages' in our present (scientific) communication. But this is
also another story... (you can find some hints on it, in English, in
a book: Information as a multidisciplinary concept, edited by Klaus
Kornwachs, published by Springer 1997).
Regards to all
Rafael
Received on Sat Mar 14 22:54:53 1998

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