From Bob Clark (931218.1520 EST)
Martin Taylor (9315 17:20)
To simplify discussion, I am responding separately to the several
topics included in your post.
INFORMATION THEORY - MMT:
The description you give does indeed not seem to add much to
understanding of PCT.
[NOTE: "The description you give" refers to my comments, Bob Clark
(931214.1710 EST) about "messages" and "receivers" following your
post, Martin Taylor (931208 18:30).]
The purpose of my discussion was to learn whether or not I was
missing something useful in Info Theory. Your observation suggests
that I did not "miss anything," and that we agree that Info Theory is
not useful to PCT.
Generally, I agree with your next comments, including reference to
various perceptions and various viewpoints. They add a bit more
detail to the discussion. I intended my recent remarks to be very
condensed summaries from the viewpoint of a physicist.
Alternatively, a PCT oriented observer might well emphasize the
details of the perceiving systems.
Quoting from me:
information theory, and physical theories in general, are all
considered "mechanical skills" -- meaningless in the absence of
living systems. They are selected and controlled by levels related
I don't think anything relating to interpretation of the world could
ever be meaningful in the absence of a mind that bases perceptions
on that interpretation.
That is my point.
What do you mean here?
I mean that, if our theories are to be useful in a world of humans,
it is necessary to explicitly include people and their
characteristics. So much discussion on the net is concerned with
physics, math and engineering, that people get left out.
I think that is exactly the same way you feel. Unfortunately,
examples, similes and metaphors from the world of mechanics keep
being offered with the intent of clarification. That, of course, is
fine, when they are appropriate and correct.
Regards, Bob Clark