Religion and Ethics Forum

Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 17, 2017, 03:34:59 PM

Title: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 17, 2017, 03:34:59 PM
Can someone who believes that all information is physical justifiably and legitimately accuse anybody of reification?
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: bluehillside Retd. on August 17, 2017, 05:08:07 PM
Vlad,

Quote
Can someone who believes that all information is physical justifiably and legitimately accuse anybody of reification?

Yes.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Sebastian Toe on August 17, 2017, 07:57:22 PM
Can someone who believes that all information is physical justifiably and legitimately accuse anybody of reification?
I believe that they can.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Steve H on August 18, 2017, 03:51:03 AM
Information, however you define it, is not physical. It is an emergent property of matter, but it is not material itself. DNA, for example, contains information, encoded in it, but it is not itself information.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 18, 2017, 08:49:19 AM
I believe that they can.
Then you need to demonstrate how the unreal information you claim is being reified is also real at the same time.Good luck with that.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 18, 2017, 09:00:08 AM
Information, however you define it, is not physical. It is an emergent property of matter, but it is not material itself. DNA, for example, contains information, encoded in it, but it is not itself information.
Yes. I think one has a problem as a reductionist and physicalist wanting everything physical and atomistic and emergent at the same time.

One ends up claiming both the physical reality of everything and the unreality suggested in a concept of reification.

In that position one wants ammunition such as reification but one also suggests that there is nothing beyond the physical.

One is left with the duty of explaining where the unreality is and what its spatial and temporal properties are.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Sebastian Toe on August 18, 2017, 10:46:24 AM
Then you need to demonstrate how the unreal information you claim is being reified is also real at the same time.Good luck with that.
I never said that I was going to do it!   ::)
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 18, 2017, 10:48:33 AM
I never said that I was going to do it!   ::)
Sad, We will never know if you could.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: bluehillside Retd. on August 18, 2017, 10:58:22 AM
SteveH,

Quote
Information, however you define it, is not physical. It is an emergent property of matter, but it is not material itself. DNA, for example, contains information, encoded in it, but it is not itself information.

It's more nuanced than that. Current thinking is that "the universe" is effectively a quantum computer - thus, the "material" is itself bits of information. Try here for example for an overview:

http://www.informationr.net/ir/18-3/colis/paperC03.html#.WZa4qq3MzuR

I can also recommend Vlatko Vedral's book "Decoding the Universe" if the subject interests you.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: bluehillside Retd. on August 18, 2017, 11:00:23 AM
Vlad the Irrationalist,

Quote
Yes. I think one has a problem as a reductionist and physicalist wanting everything physical and atomistic and emergent at the same time.

One ends up claiming both the physical reality of everything and the unreality suggested in a concept of reification.

In that position one wants ammunition such as reification but one also suggests that there is nothing beyond the physical.

One is left with the duty of explaining where the unreality is and what its spatial and temporal properties are.

Can I suggest that if you tried to find out something about the subject that might help prevent you from committing so many howlers in future?
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 18, 2017, 11:08:10 AM
Vlad the Irrationalist,

Can I suggest that if you tried to find out something about the subject that might help prevent you from committing so many howlers in future?
Its a free country. You can suggest anything that spuriously pops into your head so I see no change here.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: bluehillside Retd. on August 18, 2017, 11:33:11 AM
Vlad the Irrationalist,

Quote
Its a free country. You can suggest anything that spuriously pops into your head so I see no change here.

Like you do with "God" you mean?

Oh, and there's nothing "spurious" about suggesting that you might want to be a bit less ignorant about the subjects you presume to criticise. If anything, it might do you a favour.
Title: Re: Squaring reification with the physicality of information.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 18, 2017, 12:21:11 PM
Vlad the Irrationalist,

Like you do with "God" you mean?

Oh, and there's nothing "spurious" about suggesting that you might want to be a bit less ignorant about the subjects you presume to criticise. If anything, it might do you a favour.
I'm asking questions Hillside. Refusing to answer them on the grounds that the questioner doesn't know the answer is somewhat suspect isn't it.

Reification might be a valid accusation. Information might be physical i.e. real.
What I am asking you is how do you square a belief that information is physical(real) with reviving the notion of unreal(non physical) information which is necessary for any accusation of reification?

I'm afraid this thread is now a record of you shuffling around having to answer...............Good job for you that most folks who bother with this forum are of your ilk eh?