Pragmatic Semiotic Information • Discussion 3

Re: Ontolog ForumJFS

What I find lacking in these static ontological hierarchies is the dynamic, functional, transformational side of scientific inquiry, the process that produces the product known as knowledge.  If sciences are bodies of organized knowledge, what is the physiology of those bodies?  That is the variety of systems theory I learned in my schools, focusing on the states of systems and how they change over time.

When we apply that systems perspective to information systems, knowledge systems, systems of belief, received opinion, whatever, the state under investigation is a state of information, knowledge, and so on, and the question becomes, “What influences and operations actually do and optimally ought to update that state of information over time?”

cc: Systems ScienceStructural Modeling

This entry was posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Definition, Determination, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Pragmatism, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Pragmatic Semiotic Information • Discussion 3

  1. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.