Fw: [Fis] art and meaning

Fw: [Fis] art and meaning

From: Christophe Menant <[email protected]>
Date: Mon 20 Feb 2006 - 12:19:31 CET

Dear Pavel,
If we limit the question on “meaning” to “meaning for us humans”, I’m
affraid
we are today in the fog of our subjectivity and irrational cognitive
dimensions
as you say. But if we try to address the subject of meaning for simple
living
organisms, we can get some usable answers.
You may remember the case of meaning generation modelized for a system
submitted to a constraint where relations between information and meaning
are
explicited (short paper: http://crmenant.free.fr/ResUK/index.HTM).
The proposed Meaning Generator System is simple and applies easily to simple
animals. But it becomes more difficult to use when the constraints of the
system
are difficult to identify. This is the case for us humans where free will,
emotions
and consciousness are not well enough understood today.
And regarding art as an mode of human expression, I feel we can consider it
as
being a way to satisfy our anxiety limitation constraint. More on this at
http://www.mdpi.org/fis2005/F.45.paper.pdf
So bottom line, I feel we can say two things:
- Relations between information and meaning are addressable assuming we can
define the constraints of the system generating the meaningful information.
- Correctly addressing the notion of meaning for us humans needs a better
understanding of our nature (consciousness, free will, subjectivity,
emotions ..)
in order to get clear enough an understanding of our constraints. And art is
part of
our constraints satisfactions.
All the best
Christophe Menant

>From: "Pavel Luksha" <bowin@mail.ru>
>To: <fis@listas.unizar.es>
>Subject: Re: Fw: [Fis] art and meaning
>Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 16:34:22 +0300
>
>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

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger : appels gratuits de PC � PC partout dans le monde !
http://www.imagine-msn.com/Messenger/?locale=fr-fr

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Mon Feb 20 12:16:05 2006


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 on Mon 20 Feb 2006 - 12:16:07 CET