Re: Platonic information theories

In reply to Rafael, who wrote:
> in this case we should be able to develop a *Theory of information
> relativity*, i.e. give up (if ever we had it...) a general
representation
> of information as a kind of fluidum or 'quinta essentia' separated
> from the local systems and constraints. It seems to me that we have
> to deal with the *divide* that separates systems (as humans) being
> able to behave (in different ways) to time (and space) and systems
> *just* being in time/space (in different ways, as living/non living
systems.

The concept of two types of 'information', i.e., the universal,
understood as normative habits operative globally -which doesn't mean
the globe but the community- , and the instantiation, understood as
existent and operative in local space and time, is important. There's
a great deal of work acknowledging that there are indeed two modes of
information processing- the universal and the instantiation, and that
each type is actually carried out within different measurements or
codifications.

> But this *relation* is a problematic one, since time and space are
> not of the kind of empirical objects (as Kant stated). So too our
> relation to information is a (in a Kantian sense) *problematic* one
> (i.e. there is no *solution* as in case of empirical *problems*). To
> conceive ourselves (and our Selves) as an *information machine*
> is a *phantasmatic* idea...

Now, here, I disagree with you (or Kant). My point about time and
space is that both are actual empirical measurements, encoded into the
material instantiation. They are not absolute universal references.
The spatial measurement is an actual component of the instantiation,
and so is the temporal measurement. I suggest four spatial
measurements: internal, external, local and global. And three
(following Koichiro) temporal measurements: progressive (that's the
habitual), present and perfect. I've set these seven spatial and
temporal values up into six predicates or relations, and conclude
that reality is a result of the filiated networking of these seven
measurements within six relations.

My point is- I've abandoned the Kantian/Newtonian absolute reference.
NO. That doesn't mean a move to nominalism, where only the
instantiations exist. Both universals and instantiations of those
universals exist and are real. But there is no single external Ruler
of absolute linear time, nor is there a bucket of space.
Received on Sun Jan 5 16:04:00 2003