Re: Tim on ..Robert Rosen's working notes...

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

James,

JR:
> For point of information, Howard cites the phenotype/genotype
> relation as seminal, in one of those papers of his.


TG: Hmm, I think it would be hard to find anyone who would argue that the
genotype-phenotype relation is not seminal.


JR:
> Also to point out .. the issue of initial structure/information
> vis a vis secondary and later subsequent information tiers
> (sometimes differentiated as form versus meaning) has for the
> past half century been the topic domain of Cybernetics (rather
> than Semiotics per se, which also in its own way deals with
> 'meaning' vs symbols of conveyance).


TG: The point of my remarks, and I believe Rosen's intention in his notes,
was to examine these kind of situations involving fractionation and
resulting missing information from an angle other than the usual ones;
namely from the perspective of the modelling relation. That perhaps the
modelling relation has a wider currency, that modelling relations might be
immanent in these kinds of situations, and that this approach might provide
novel insights outside of those provided by previous approaches.

Regards,
Tim