The physics of symbols: bridging the epistemic cut

Pattee, H. H.

doi:10.1016/s0303-2647(01)00104-6

Cited by 169 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(v) The replacement of a symbol by a physically different one, either with the same or with a different meaning, is energetically practically neutral. Symbols are "energy-degenerate" [14]. Any forces driving a modified message back to some fictitious distinguished "equilibrium message" are virtually absent.…”

Section: Definition 1 Symbolic Information Is Information That Is Rementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Information constitutes a bridge between lifeless physics and living beings struggling for survival. It is obtained by "measurement in which a rate-dependent dynamical state is coded into quiescent symbols" [14], and created by trial and error in the course of Darwinian evolution. The emergence of symbolic information may "distinguish the living from the lifeless", as the problem was raised already by Pearson ([15], p. 341).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structural and Symbolic Information in the Context of the General Theory of Information

Burgin

Feistel

2017

Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The general theory of information, which includes syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, and many other special theories of information, provides theoretical and practical tools for discerning a very large diversity of different kinds, types, and classes of information. Some of these kinds, types, and classes are more important and some are less important. Two basic classes are formed by structural and symbolic information. While structural information is intrinsically imbedded in the structure of the corresponding object or domain, symbolic information is represented by symbols, the meaning of which is subject to arbitrary conventions between people. As a result, symbolic information exists only in the context of life, including technical and theoretical constructs created by humans. Structural information is related to any objects, systems, and processes regardless of the existence or presence of life. In this paper, properties of structural and symbolic information are explored in the formal framework of the general theory of information developed by Burgin because this theory offers more powerful instruments for this inquiry. Structural information is further differentiated into inherent, descriptive, and constructive types. Properties of correctness and uniqueness of these types are investigated. In addition, predictive power of symbolic information accumulated in the course of natural evolution is considered. The phenomenon of ritualization is described as a general transition process from structural to symbolic information.

show abstract

Section: Definition 1 Symbolic Information Is Information That Is Rementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural and Symbolic Information in the Context of the General Theory of Information

Burgin

Feistel

2017

Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But the cell is also a self-replicating system and Pattee concluded, on the basis of von Neumann's logic, that the genotype must be a symbolic description of the cell. This is the argument that he used to conclude that "life is matter controlled by symbols", a theme that he developed for nearly forty years in various publications (Pattee 1968(Pattee , 1972(Pattee , 1973(Pattee , 1980(Pattee , 1995(Pattee , 2001(Pattee , 2007(Pattee , 2008. The idea that symbols exist at the cellular level was the first explicit argument in favour of biological semiosis.…”

Section: A Molecular Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Howard Pattee has repeatedly underlined that "life can only be described in the language of physics as special constraints" and that "there are no fundamental principles beyond laws, constraints and natural selection" (Pattee 2001(Pattee , 2008. This means that natural selection is regarded as a 'special' constraint, but what is it that makes it 'special', i.e.…”

Section: Part 2 -Towards a Unified Science The Difference Between Phymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Short History of Biosemiotics

Barbieri

2009

Biosemiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biosemiotics is the synthesis of biology and semiotics, and its main purpose is to show that semiosis is a fundamental component of life, i.e., that signs and meaning exist in all living systems. This idea started circulating in the 1960s and was proposed independently from enquires taking place at both ends of the Scala Naturae. At the molecular end it was expressed by Howard Pattee's analysis of the genetic code, whereas at the human end it took the form of Thomas Sebeok's investigation into the biological roots of culture. Other proposals appeared in the years that followed and gave origin to different theoretical frameworks, or different schools, of biosemiotics. They are: (1) the physical biosemiotics of Howard Pattee and its extension in Darwinian biosemiotics by Howard Pattee and by Terrence Deacon, (2) the zoosemiotics proposed by Thomas Sebeok and its extension in sign biosemiotics developed by Thomas Sebeok and by Jesper Hoffmeyer, (3) the code biosemiotics of Marcello Barbieri and (4) the hermeneutic biosemiotics of Anton Markoš. The differences that exist between the schools are a consequence of their different models of semiosis, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. In reality they go much deeper and concern the very nature of the new discipline. Is biosemiotics only a new way of looking at the known facts of biology or does it predict new facts? Does biosemiotics consist of testable hypotheses? Does it add anything to the history of life and to our understanding of evolution? These are the major issues of the young discipline, and the purpose of the present paper is to illustrate them by describing the origin and the historical development of its main schools.

show abstract

“…Even if conscious moods arise as artifacts of coded construction (Barbieri 2006), these moods are as different from the coding process as phenotype generally (including the ribosomal apparatus) is different from genotype. Cartesian dualism, like the epistemic cut between observer and observed (Pattee 2001) still stands! "Cognitive phenomena can be explained either with functionalist-cybernetic or with meaning-based semiotic approaches, but neither provides a complete explanation."…”

Section: Inside / Outsidementioning

confidence: 99%

Inside / Outside

Salthe

2009

Biosemiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Søren Brier is a thinker who seems to have come to Peircean semiotics because of anxiety about the fact that cognitive science lacks contact with subjectivity. From another point of view, I myself have considered that this semiotic approach might provide a way to expand science more generally away from its mechanistic habits. Brier's book attempts to examine texts related to information science from a Peircean semiotic perspective, with a view towards better understanding, or possibly even subverting, Cartesian dualism. For this purpose he examines the cognitive science-autopoietic and ethological discourses as reflecting one branch of science's nearest approach to mentality; neurology is not given significant attention. But the attempt reaches a stalemate as the book closes upon what I would call the internalism / externalism complementarity. Charles Peirce asserted that feeling is an integral aspect of the world generally, and hinted as well that it could be transformed into mattergy, but science, in its Twentieth Century eagerness to serve technology, has dismissed such ideas as 'pseudoscience'. Brier does not examine possibilities opened up by quantum mechanics on this issue (e.g., Laszlo 1995), although Penrose's thinking is mentioned from time to time. While Brier does not succeed in 'squaring' the Cartesian 'circle', he circles around the project vigorously, returning again and again to the quest (redundancy works!) while taking the reader on a long trek in search of this grail. This is an extremely rich text, and my focus here upon a few of its important points will not do it justice overall.The major problem driving the inquiry in this book is signaled by the subtitle: "Information Is Not Enough" (to understand understanding). To this end Brier proposes to meld together classical science, systems and cybernetic science, and Peircean semiotic in his 'cybersemiotic model', laid out in a final chapter. The incommensurability or incompatibility of the internalist and externalist perspectives (subjective / objective; conscious experience / information processing; res cogitans / res extensa) is in my view the overriding reason for the existence of this book,

show abstract

The physics of symbols: bridging the epistemic cut

Cited by 169 publications

References 12 publications

Structural and Symbolic Information in the Context of the General Theory of Information

Structural and Symbolic Information in the Context of the General Theory of Information

A Short History of Biosemiotics

Inside / Outside

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About