I defined macroinformation as complex information emerging from frictions among categories. I've given illustrations of grammatical frictions, usage frictions, logical frictions ... To go deep with me you must know something of my existential categories, sets and sub-sets. I name them, then introduce them:
Existence0
Similarly, sentiences such as civilized humans dignify some individuals, bestowing Personhood on them. On the dark side, personhood can also be denied. Go to any prison and you will see some of civilization's rituals for stripping personhood. Some such distinctions we'll agree with: I don't agitate to extend the franchise to dogs; others any among us may disagree with: was Jesus really a felon? or a god?
Sentiens is a true and meaningful subset of Creatura; I acknowledge that my further dividing both Sentiens and Persona between their obverse side and a dark side is moot.
Earlier draft(s need the more revision):
Shannon (and Wiener) defined information in terms of probability. Bateson emphasized difference. Bateson also spoke of emergences at new levels of complexity, unpredictable from any component level. I wed all that into Macroinformation. Macroinformation is complex information which emerges from frictions among categories. Grammatical incompatibilities, such as Shakespeare's noun cluster "salad days," initiated my illustrations nearly half a century ago. Here I build my understanding of "categories" from the "ground" up.
Modern physics imagines time and space being born together. Theology had previously distinguished time from eternity: the world and time were evanescent; God's Eternity was, well, eternal. Ilya Prigogine assumes that time is infinite. I try to follow what Hawking is up to, I've always liked theology, but when it comes to "understanding" experience, I follow Prigogine: or try to. The shoes Bateson helped me put on help there too.
Understand: what I say here is NOT received wisdom. My understanding is incompatible with conventional understanding. To see my macroinformation you must see the difference between my macroinformation and conventionally understood information.
Categories
Once again, I'm talking about macroinformation emerging from friction among categories. Here I'm establishing what I mean by categories. A few basic existential distinctions are essential.
Gregory Bateson emphasized differences between the physical universe and the universe of life, chiding his fellow scientists for routinely confusing them. Predicting what will happen after you hit the cue ball is different from predicting what will happen after you hit the dog. I add a distinction within the universe of life: and find I must add a Prigoginean distinction before we even get to the physical universe: time. And with time I add a distinction I may wind up seeing as a synonym for time: existence: existence as potential. Before existence can exist it must be possible for existence to exist: before there can be information, there must be difference. Before there can be difference, difference must be possible. So: time is infinite, possibility exceeds actuality.
Theologians had one thing right: you can't go too far into any serious philosophy without bumping up against cosmology. pk information can't be understood without pk cosmology.
pk Cosmology: Time, Space ...
Originally there was time. Space came into being within time. Time is the set; space is a subset. Time is the set, the universe is a subset. Space and the universe cannot be separated. Time and the universe can be separated: though not in the time in which the universe exists.
When I talk about "existence," you may take it as current with time. Possible existence precedes actual existence. Alternate existences may exist long after actual existence ceases. If time is infinite, then so is potential existence.
This universe Gregory Bateson divides into two different categories of existence. He calls the physical universe Pleroma: the better to distinguish the universe of life, Creatura. Scientists of Pleroma talk with great confidence about predictability, Newtonian mechanics ... what the billiard ball will do when treated precisely, in precise conditions. Bateson studied the universe of life. I hit the cue ball, the 8 ball goes into the side pocket. If I hit the dog, the possibility referenced above, in the same way that I hit the cue ball, the dog may cringe, the dog may run, the dog may bite me. It's a different world, it needs a different science.
Shannon, sponsored by the phone company, developed his information science "in Pleroma." It's about characteristics of a signal transmitted over a wire. Wiener said that there's more "information" in a great poem than there is in the Manhattan phone book. Wiener's information took account of Creatura.
However Shannon was dealing with Pleroma, he was doing it in Creatura. We are humans, talking about our world. I follow Bateson, but find I must further divide Creatura, distinguishing among life, aware life, and self-aware life. (Note here that Bateson understood concepts such as "intelligence" and "learning" to apply more widely than merely to individuals. He found intelligence and learning in a red wood forest, in a sea coast, in a species, as well as in you and me. Me too: I follow Bateson very much there too.) I mark this further distinction with my term Sentiens: the universe of sentience.
Sentiens
Thus we have Time: or Existence0. And we have Existence1: Pleroma, the physical universe. (An alternate univere might have a universe with different characteristics, it might even not have a Pleroma!) Still in Bateson's universe, slightly modified, we have Existence2: Creatura, the universe of life. Now, pk cosmology: very much a Korzybskian, Batesonian, Prigogenean universe: I add Existence3: Sentiens: the universe of self-awareness. Qualitative differences can become quantitative; quantitative differences can become qualitative.
exploration and revision proceeding simultaneously
No comments:
Post a Comment