Towards a Theory of Semantic Communication
May 31st, 2011Posted in Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
Confirmation Measures and Transmitted Information
May 30th, 2011The following Bayesian confirmation measure is associated with John Maynard Keynes, having appeared in his A Treatise on Probability (1921). The degree to which evidence e confirms hypothesis h is given as:

Interestingly, this is strongly reminiscent of a subsequent measure found in Shannon information theory. In philosophy literature, this formula can be found in Dretske’s formulation of information transmission derived from Shannon’s work as well as a measure of transmitted information given by Hintikka.
Posted in Epistemology, Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
Entropy Is Universal Rule of Language
May 18th, 2011Posted in Miscellaneous, Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
What Does CONT() Measure?
May 15th, 2011I have been reading over Luciano Floridi’s recently released The Philosophy of Information. Chapter 5 is basically his paper Outline of a Theory of Strongly Semantic Information (TSSI).
Under such a theory, the Bar-Hillel/Carnap CONT(s) measure, associated with a Theory of Weakly Semantic Information (TWSI) does not provide an indication of the amount of informativeness of a statement s. But rightly so, “given the usefulness of TWSI, CONT(s) should probably be salvaged, if possible”.
If so, then what does CONT(s) really purport to indicate? Floridi writes that “[CONT(s)] does not indicate the quantity of semantic information but, more precisely, the quantity of data in [s]” (pg. 128.).
I think that I agree with this point, but would qualify that it indicates the quantity of meaningful data (i.e. semantic content).
In an earlier post, I mentioned that “[CONT()] be seen as a measure of semantic content (meaningful, well-formed data), rather than a measure of semantic information”.
Posted in Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
A Gettierised (Russellised) Historical Fact?
May 11th, 2011I finally dug up my copy of Russell’s Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits and located the passage in which he gives the Gettier-like broken clock example (15 years before Gettier’s paper):
It is very easy to give examples of true beliefs that are not knowledge. There is the man who looks at a clock which is not going, though he thinks it is, and who happens to look at it at the moment when it is right; this man acquires a true belief as to the time of day, but cannot be said to have knowledge.
This passage is found in Section ‘D. Knowledge’, at the end of the Chapter ‘Fact, Belief, Truth, and Knowledge’.
Most would agree that this is not a case of knowledge. But how far can we carry this? Take the following example: A famous historical figure (X) dies and a medical staff member in attendance records X’s exact time of death using a clock hanging on the wall. This clock is also broken but happens to be stuck on the actual time, say, 6pm. Now, although the staff member records a fact (a true proposition), they do not actually know that X died at 6pm. Furthermore, by standard Dretskean information-theoretic epistemology, neither are they informed by the clock that X died at 6pm.
If the staff member does not have knowledge of nor are they informed of the time of death, is what they record a piece of information? Can a recorded fact be information or knowledge if the source of that record neither was informed of nor knew the proposition in question? If their record is used in a biographical book on X, can someone who reads this book 100 years later come to know that X died at 6pm?
Posted in Epistemology, Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
Supplementing Belief Revision for The Aim of Truthlikeness
April 30th, 2011New little piece I put together: Supplementing Belief Revision for The Aim of Truthlikeness
Posted in Epistemology, Logic | No Comments »
‘Concepts of Information’ course
April 22nd, 2011Website for a course held last year on concepts of information, packed with slides and reading lists: http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i218/s10/Home.html
Posted in Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
New Books on Information
April 20th, 2011Just picked up a copy of James Gleick’s The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood. Should make for some good casual reading; hopefully I can find the time to read it.
Also, Perspectives on Information is another information-related book that has just been published.
Posted in Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »
Respecting Relevance in Belief Change
April 19th, 2011I recently read a short and interesting article; Respecting Relevance in Belief Change, which is concerned with investigating the extent to which the formal operations of AGM belief change respect criteria of relevance.
Posted in Epistemology, Logic, Philosophy and/of Information | No Comments »