Dear Soeren and Loet,
it stroke my mind that the meaning could be something that avoids being
measured. It is the same problem that we have with science itself: the more
we try to describe world in rigid terms, the more of the real world slips
through these terms. Since we humans as cognitive subjects have both verbal
and non-verbal cognition, rational and irrational cognitive dimension, we
only capture part of the picture. New narratives are created, but meaning of
original narratives, or objects from which they originate, is never fully
explained.
Is this a methodological cul-de-sac?
Pavel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Søren Brier" <sbr.lpf@cbs.dk>
To: "Stanley N. Salthe" <ssalthe@binghamton.edu>;
<fis@listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: SV: Fw: [Fis] art and meaning
> Dear Stan and Gordana
>
> When you talk information here are you thinking of Shannon or Wiener
> information? Or some logical measure of structure and organization? Or do
> you include meaning?
>
> Luhmann says that a message is consisting of meaning, information and the
> form of expression.
>
> It makes sense to me that information is the quantitative and structural
> aspect of meaning and intention.
>
> But I see no way of measuring meaning. Luhmann talks of a surplus of
> possibilities of choice and action, which, I do not find sufficient for
> instance to describe the meaning of a religious og philosophical message
> about the meaning of suffering and love.
>
>
> Søren
>
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Sun Feb 19 14:30:32 2006
