QueeneMUSE@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/23/2000 5:13:07 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> dah@signalinteractive.com writes:
>
> << My point here, is that it is the observer that
> determines uniqueness and value of the information comprising an object,
> regardless of its actual, physical deviation from random stuff. >>
>
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?
You both refer to an equivocation that has always plagued
information theory.
In general, "information" is the output of the process of
interpreting data. But this information, as an original output,
can itself become data input to interpretative processing,
leading to new information.
Therefore, "uniqueness" (or not) and "value" (or not) are
also information about the original information. It gets worse:
a group of sensations is the original data; after processing,
our information is that these sensations imply a concept
"object" having the properties P, P', P"... which then as
percept becomes a new data input.........
So that what is consciously perceived is information. As
William James noticed a long time ago, "raw data" is simply
the "blooming, buzzing confusion of sensation".
Sorry,
Bob
=======================
Robert M. Owen
Director
The Orion Institute
57 W. Morgan Street
Brevard, NC 28712-3659 USA
=======================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:37 MDT