Hi all,
ROG:
I found the evolution of knowledge article fascinating. I have always loved the idea of Memes since I first heard about them. Has
the Meme like nature of ZMM and MOQ been discussed on this list before? Seems like it should be.
I have also been doing some reading. I found the following definition of information at:
http://www.alunos.uevora.pt/~l14370/notebooks/Information%20Theory.html
Apparently it comes from the Oxford Dictionary of Computing, but I don't have this available to check. It also seems to include at
least one typo, but it doesn't seem to change its meaning.
I have inserted some comments of my own:
ODC:
"information -
Generally, information is whatever is capable of causing a human mind to change its opinion about the current state of the real
world."
GRAHAM:
In the sense that our individual realities could be described as our opinion about the current state of the world, then I suppose
information could be said to influence (our individual) reality. But I am not sure that is what you were saying. When I talk about
reality what comes out is my opinion about it, but what I am trying to grasp is the whole thing. I am sure you are the same.
ODC:
"Formally, and especially in science and engineering, information is whatever contributes to a reduction in the uncertainty of the
state of the system; in this case, uncertainty is usually expressed in an objectively measurable form. Commonly, this is done by
means of Shannon's entropy.
Nevertheless, this formula for uncertainty involves, and these may well have to be subjective. If that is so, the formal measurement
must be qualified as depending on subjective probabilities, and "uncertainty" must be replaced by "opinion, or personal estimate, of
uncertainty"."
GRAHAM:
I would love to know what should come after "involves" in the second sentence - does anybody have a copy of the ODC so they can
check?. Whatever it is, I think it is interesting to reframe this paragraph from the first and last sentences as: "information is
whatever contributes to a reduction in opinion (as opposed to knowledge)". That puts a new spin on what an opinion is for me. When
someone says "in my opinion" what they are really saying is "in my personal estimate of uncertainty". Hmm
ODC:
Information must be distinguished from any medium that is capable of carrying it. A physical medium (such as a magnetic disk) may
carry a logical medium (data, such as binary or text symbols). The information content of any physical objects, or logical data,
cannot be measured or discussed until it is known what range of possibilities existed before and after they were received. The
information lies in the reduction in uncertainty resulting from the receipt of the objects or the data, and not in the size or
complexity of the objects or data themselves. Questions of the form, function, and semantics import of data are only relevant to
information inasmuch as they contribute to the reduction of uncertainty. If an identical memorandum is received twice, it does not
convey twice the information that its first occurrence conveyed: the second occurrence conveys no information at all, unless, by
prior agreement, the number of occurrences is itself to be regarded as significant.
GRAHAM:
This is interesting. We seem to have a hierarchy consisting of four levels:
1. Physical Media
2. Logical Media - Data (Horse's noise?, or should it be at level one?)
3. Information
4. Knowledge
I think there is some kind of parallel with the four systems of the MOQ (LILA Chapter 12), and Pirsig seems to recognise this with
his analogy with computer technology on the following pages. But I can't quite see how it fits together, and I don't think it is
possible to tick them off as corresponding to Inorganic, Biological, etc. Even if you could, where does DQ fit in with this? Maybe
there is something missing.
The parallels are interesting We have four systems that are not exclusive. "They all operate at the same time and in ways that are
almost independent of each other".
Neither are they continuous. "They are discreet. They have little to do with one another. Although each higher level is built on a
lower one it is not an extension of that lower level".
I suppose that the question is:
Is there some basic connection or similarity that means we are talking about the same thing, or is this some special class of
hierarchy that just happens to exhibit similar behaviour? An analogy would be the way that Memes are said to exhibit virus like
behaviour. This doesn't mean that they are viruses, but implies that there must be some basic similarity in pattern.
Or am I rambling now?
Graham
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:43 BST