The informational stance: Philosophy and logic. Part I. The basic theories

Wu Kun; Joseph E. Brenner

doi:10.12775/LLP.2013.019

Authors

Wu Kun Xi’An Jiaotong University, Xi’An
Joseph E. Brenner International Center for Transdisciplinary Research, Paris (CIRET)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2013.019

Keywords

contradiction, dialectics, dynamics, ethics, information, interactions, logic, ontology, phenomenology, systems, values, transdisciplinarity

Abstract

To better understand what information is and to explain information-related issues has become an essential philosophical task. General concepts from science, ethics and sociology are insufficient. As noted by Floridi, a new philosophy, a Philosophy of Information (PI), is needed. In the 80’s, Wu Kun proposed a “The Basic Theory of the Philosophy of Information”, which became available in English only in 2010. Wu and Joseph Brenner then found that the latter’s non-standard “Logic in Reality” provided critical logical support for Wu’s theory. In Part I of our paper, we outline the two basic theories as a metaphilosophy and metalogic for information. We offer our two theories as a further contribution to an informational paradigm. In Part II [WuB14], we develop the relation between information and social value as a basis for the ethical development of the emerging Information Society.

Author Biography

Wu Kun, Xi’An Jiaotong University, Xi’An

International Center for the Philosophy of Information

References

[All98] Allaby, M., A Dictionary of Plant Sciences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998.

[Béz00] Béziau, J.-Y. (ed.), Logica Universalis. Towards a General Theory of Logic, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, Boston, Berlin, 2000.

[Béz07] Béziau, J.-Y., and A. Costa-Leite (eds.), Perspectives on Universal Logic, Polimetrica, 2007.

[Bre05] Brenner, J.E., “Process in reality: A logical offering”, Logic and Logical Philosophy, 14 (2005): 165–202. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2005.012

[Bre08] Brenner, J.E., Logic in Reality, Springer, Dordrecht, 2008.

[Bre09] Brenner, J.E., “Prolegomenon to a logic for the information society”, triple7-c, 7 (2009), 1: 38–73. Link

[Bre10] Brenner, J.E., “The logic of tthical information”, Knowledge, Technology, Policy, 23 (2010), 1–2: 109–133.

[Bre10a] Brenner, J.E., “The philosophical logic of Stéphane Lupasco”, Logic and Logical Philosophy, 19 (2010): 243–285. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2010.009

[Bre10b] Brenner, J.E., “Levels of abstraction. Levels of reality”, Knowledge, Technology, Policy (in press).

[Bre11] Brenner, J.E., “On representation in information theory”, Information, 2 (2011): 560–578. DOI: 10.3390/info2030560

[Col03] Collier, J., “Fundamental properties of self-organization”, in V. Arshinov and C. Fuchs (eds.), Causality, Emergence, Self-organization, NIA-Piroda, Moscow, 2003, pp. 150–166.

[Dea11] Deacon, T.A., Incomplete Nature. How Mind Evolved from Matter, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, London, 2011.

[Flo10] Floridi, L., The Philosophy of Information, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., 2010.

[Fre10] French, S., “The interdependence of structure, objects and dependence”, Synthese, 175 (2010): 89–109. DOI: 10.1007/s11229-010-9734-2

[Fuc06] Fuchs, C., “The dialectic of the nature-society system”, triple-C, 4 (2006), 1: 1–39.

[Gri96] Grize, J.B., Logique naturelle et communications, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1996.

[He06] He, H.-C., and Z.-T. He, Philosophy Significance of Universal Logic, Northwestern Polytechnic University of China Press, Xi’An, 2006.

[He05] He, H.-Can et al, Principle of Universal Logics, Science Press/NWPU Press, Xi’An, 2005.

[He07] He, H.-C., “Dialectical contradictions and Universal Logics? The spectrum phenomenon in Flexible Logic”, in J.-Y. Béziau, H.-Can He et al. (eds.), UNILOG’07, 2007, Link

[Hof09] Hofkirchner, W., “How to achieve a unified theory of information”, triple-C 7, 2 (2009): 357–358. Link

[Ily74] Ilyenkov, E. Dialectical Logic, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1974. Link

[Lad07] Ladyman, J., and D. Ross, Every Thing Must Go. Metaphysics Naturalized, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.

[Ley09] Leydesdorff, L., “Redundancy in systems which entertain a model of themselves. Interaction information and the self-organization of anticipation”, preprint for ENTROPY, 2009.

[Luh10] Luhn, G., “Towards an ontology of information and succeeding fundamentals in computing science”, paper, 4 th International Conference on the Foundations of Information Science, August, 2010, Beijing.

[Lup47] Lupasco. S., Logique et Contradiction, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1947.

[Lup67] Lupasco, S. Qu‘est-ce qu’ une structure?, Christian Bourgois, Paris, 1967.

[Lup87] Lupasco, S., Le principe d’antagonisme et la logique de l’énergie, Editions du Rocher, Paris, 1987. (Originally published by Éditions Hermann, Paris, 1951.)

[Mag02] Magnani, L., in L. Magnani and N.J. Nersessian (eds.), Preface to Model Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2002.

[Mar10] Mares, E., “The nature of information: a relevant approach”, Synthese, 175 (2011): 111–132. DOI: 10.1007/s11229-010-9737-z

[Min03] Mindell, D., and S. Gerovitch, “Cybernetics and information theory in the United States, France and the Soviet Union”, in M. Walker (ed.), Science and Ideology: A Comparative History, Routledge, London, 2003, pp. 66–95.

[Mon70] Monod, J., Le hasard et la nécessité, Point Seuil, Paris, 1970.

[Pri89] Priest, G., “Dialectic and dialetheic”, Science & Society, 53 (1989): 388–415.

[Ram98] Ramachandran, V. S., and S. Blakeslee, Phantoms in the Brain ˙ Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind, Harper, Collins, New York, 1998.

[Que08] Queiroz, J., C. Emmeche, and C.N. El-Hani., “A Peircean approach to ‘information’ and its relationship with Bateson’s and Jablonka’s ideas”, The American Journal of Semiotics, 24 (2008), 1–3: 75–94. DOI: 10.5840/ajs2008241/36

[Sar43] Sartre, J.-P., L’etre et le néant, Gallimard, Paris, 1943.

[Sei09] Seibt, J., “Forms of emergent interaction in general process theory”, Synthese, 166: 479–512. DOI: 10.1007/s11229-008-9373-z

[Tay75] Taylor, C., Hegel, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1975.

[Var99] Varela, F.J., “The specious present”, in J. Petitot et al. (eds.), Naturalizing Phenomenology. Issues in Contemporary Phenomenology and Cognitive Science, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1999.

[Wu88] Wu Kun, “‘In the name of the natural’ to express nature”, in Dialectics of Nature, January 19, 1988.

[Wu90] Wu Kun, Natural Logic, Xi’an, Northwest University Press, 1990.

[Wu94-05] Wu Kun, “On a new realm of natural evolution”, Journal of Northwest University (Social Science Edition), 2 (1994): 7–13. Pages 266–275 in Philosophy of Information – Theory, System, Method, Beijing: Commercial Press, 2005.

[Wu02] Wu Kun, “Information thinking. A new kind of pattern of scientific thinking”, Journal of the Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences), 23 (2002): 60–91.

[Wu04] Wu Kun, “Objective reality, substance realism, energy doctrine” and “Non-hypostatization of materialism? on the scientific value of Lenin’s concept of material objective reality”, Journal of the Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences), 24 (2004), 2: 69–75.

[Wu10] Wu Kun, “The basic theory of philosophy of information”, paper, 4th International Conference on the Foundations of Information Science, August, 2010, Beijing.

[WuB14] Wu Kun, and J.E. Brenner, “The informational stance: Philosophy and logic. Part II: From physics to society”, Logic and Logical Philosophy. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2013.020