| Topic: | Re:Information as a nominalization |
| Posted by: | Thomas B |
| Date/Time: | 13/07/2004 04:30:06 |
|
"Have you ever look at the concept of information as a nominalization? We use this notion as if something could be about something else in itself. " I always liked Pierces way of dealing with symbols, basically it goes like this; a symbol has three parts: the sign, the object in the world it refers to and an interpreter (who connects the sign with the object). Gets rid of a lot of mystical metaphysics like meaning and such. I tend to think that one can reason analogously regarding information when asking the metamodel question: How is information about something else? Thanks to an interpreter - an actor who connects the information with the world. Best Thomas |