Download OP Series - 3 - MBPeasePAI-lS provision of access informational

1
OP Series -3
10 Jun 06
OP Series - 3: A NOUMENON LABELED INFORMATION
Introduction
As is indicated in the Preface, the Sources for considering the perception of, definition and usage
of information are as cited in the footnotes and the two dictionaries: Oxford English Dictionary
and the Merriam-Webster New Collegiate Dictionary.
The New Collegiate was published from 1898 - 1948 as Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. The
New Collegiate text used for this chapter is the Eighth, 1973 edition as printed in 1981. Once or
twice the Seventh, 1963 is cited.
Th use of information as an ‘attributive’ (e.g. information science) was introduced volume II,
published in 1976, Supplement to the 1933 edition of the OED. Since this was a significant
development in the perception, definition and usage of information. Some consideration must be
given to the OED’s publishing history. Two quotes, one from Introduction, and one from the
Preface, of the OED’s 2nd Edition, 1989:
First from the Introduction: “This new edition of the Oxford English Dictionary contains the whole
text, unaltered in all essentials, of the twelve volume first edition, which appeared in 1933 as a
reprint of the ten volume English Dictionary on Historical Principles, itself originally published in
parts between 1884 and 1928. It [the 2nd] also contains the complete text of the four volume
Supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary published between 1972 and 1986, this superceded
the previous Supplement which was issued in 1933 as a companion to the main work.”
Second from the Preface: “This second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary amalgamates the
text of the first edition” ... “ the Supplement,” .... “and approximately five thousand words, which
have gained currency since the relevant volume of the Supplement was published.” 1/
To emphasize developments in perception, definition an usage of information, all three OED’s are
cited in some instances. The focus of this chapter is perception, definition and usage as relates to
the informational item and its cycle.
Perception: Noumenon: substantive and/or noun
The OED entry for information is, of course, extensive in comparison to Webster. One possible
point of comparison is the mathematical sense of information. This relatively recent sense did not
appear in the OED 1933. In Webster’s 1963, “5. A numerical quantity that ,,,” 2/ The OED
Supplement 1976, however, presented this sense as sub sense ‘d’ of sense 3: “3.... d as a
2
mathematically defined quantity ...” 3/ Webster’s 1981 ‘followed; this determination,
presenting this also as a sub sense of sense 2: “2, ,,, f, a quantitative measure of the content of
information ,,, “ 4/ In the OED 2nd, 1989, it is presented as sub sense d of sense 3, branch I: “I.3. d.
As a mathematically defined quantity (see quots); one which represents the degree of choice
exercised in the selection or formation of ... in terms of the statistical probabilities of occurrence of
the symbol or the elements of the message.” 5/ Sub sense 3, branch I of the OED 2nd. 1989 is
comparable with Webster’s 1981 sense 1 and 2, with sub sense a thru f. 6/ The legal sense
(Webster 1981, senses 3 and 4; OED 2nd 1989, branch I, senses 4 and 5 are also comparable. The
OED 2nd 1989 sense 6, branch I relates to ‘other’ (not English?) Systems; the OED 2nd 1989 The
OED’s sense 7 (‘the action of informing’ is marked obsolete) is considered branch II. Sense 8, is
branch III and is the attributive entry. This (first) appeared in the OED Supplement, 1976. It
does not appear in Webster’s 1981. Overall, then, the two texts are comparable;
The grammatical designations employed by OED 2nd 1989 and Webster’s 1973 are not the same,
although they are compatible. One uses ‘substantive’, the other uses ‘noun’ for grammatical
function. In their ‘introductions’ Webster’s 1989 uses ‘entries’ when referring to text; OED 2nd
1989 uses signification or senses. This instigator finds ‘signification’ more suitable, therefore
uses that term for the entire text in place of entry. When referring to a specific part of the text,
‘sense’ is used.
The grammatical designations employed by the OED and Webster’s are not the same. The OED
employs the functional label ‘substantive’ or the notation ‘sb’, as stated in the OED’s General
Explanations, both 1933 & 2nd 1989: “All words having no grammatical designation are
substantive, the letters sb are employed only where required to avoid ambiguity.” 7/ Webster’s
uses the designation ‘n’ and employs in all entries an italic notation indicating grammatical
function: “An italic label indicating a part of speech or some other functional classification follows
the pronunciation or, if no pronunciation is given, the main entry.” 8/ While Webster’s
Explanatory Notes puts forward the above quote, it lists some function, but does not define them.
This is also the case for the OED 2nd 1989. A comparison of the OED and Webster of the
signification for ’noun’ shows the first sense to be similar. The 2nd sense in Webster presents the
grammatical function, where as the OED’s 2nd sense presents noun substantive. Webster
presents two senses, the OED’s 3 rd sense is noun adjective. In its Explanatory Notes Webster’s
discusses ‘inflected form (nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs). A discussion of ‘attributive
nouns’ follows the section on ‘capitalization’. A comparison of their signification for
‘substantive’ show both consider ‘substantive’ an adjective, but the OED indicates ‘ substantive’
can also be a ‘sb’ Webster’s indicates the ‘n’ is ‘substantiveness’. Webster’s shows 5 senses, 1
thru3 have sub senses. The OED’ adjective has seven senses, and its noun has two, the first has
two sub senses, the second being designated obs. The OED’s 2nd sense is also labeled obs.
A ‘difference’ is in the ‘attributive’ designation; It does not appear in Webster’s 1973 entry
Although this sentry is followed by entries for the nouns information retrieval, information science
and information theory. As noted above, in the OED, the attributive appear as branch III, sense 8.
Although not noted as branch III, sense 8 appears in the OED Supplement 1976. While the OED
3
2nd 1989 has a main entry for the term ‘information theory’ which it defines in terms of the
mathematical sense (branch I, sense 3, sub sense d) the nouns entered in Webster’s 1973 are
entered in the attributive, sense 8, of the OED. By making the attributive a ‘branch’ the ‘noun’ if
becomes more an attributive than a substantive, but the signification remains. The OED’s
substantive is considerably more complex than Webster’s noun. In OED’s branch I, sense 1, sub
senses a thru d, is presented as the ‘action of informing’, but sense 3 of branch I, is presented the
substantive which is comparable to Webster’s noun.
Webster’s attributive entries are main entries, whereas the OED attributive is branch I, sense 8 of
the signification for information. The conclusion, here, is that both dictionaries assume the
signification for information will also be comparable whether used as a substantive or as an
attributive. The text of these two items (Webster’s 1973, entry for information and the OED
text, branch I, sense 3, sub sense a thru c) reveal their substantive and/or noun has the aspect of a
noumenon.
:
Perception: Noumenon: ‘a thing in itself’
The full texts are not being quoted; Webster’s is the smaller, therefore more fully quoted, omitted
senses 3 and 4 (legal). Illustrative quotes in the OED are omitted as are branch I, sense 3, sub
sense d (mathematical) thru branch III, sense 8 (attributive). 9/
WEBSTER’S: “information n 1: the communication or reception of knowledge or intelligence 2
a: knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction b: intelligence, news c: facts, data
d: a signal or character (as in a communication system or computer) representing data e :
something (as a message experimental data, or a picture) which justifies change in a construct (as a
plan or theory) that represents physical or mental experience or another construct f: quantitative
measure of the content of information specif : a numerical quantity in the outcome of an
experiment to be performed .... “
OED: ‘information .... I. ... 3.a. Knowledge communicated concerning some particular fact,
subject, or event; that of which one is apprised or told; intelligence, news, spec. contrasted with
data ....” [obs] b. with an and pl. an item of information of intelligence; a fact or circumstance of
which one is told. In earlier use, an account, relation, narrative (of something) obs.....“ c.
Separated from, or without the implication of, reference to a person informed that which inheres in
one of two or more alternative sequences, arrangements, etc., that produce different responses in
something, and which is capable of being stored in, transferred by and communicated to inanimate
things. ...
A comparison of the text of the significations of the two dictionaries indicates that both perceive
information to be ‘a thing in itself’. Webster’s sense 1 and OED’s branch I, sense 3.a indicate a
thing that is a ‘communication or reception’ ... or that is ‘communicated’. Webster’s 2.a thru e
and OED’s branch I, sense 3.c indicate ‘itself’. The ‘thing in itself’ aspect indicates the
complexity of our perception of information, but also its perception as a noumenon.
4
As indicated by The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1967 edition, Volume Six, its article, entitled
Phenomenology signed by Richard Schmitt, contemporary practitioners of the discipline perceive
‘phenomenon’ much as did Kant: “Kant distinguished objects and events as they appear in our
experience from objects and events as they are in themselves, independently of the from imposed
on them by our cognitive faculties. The former he called “phenomena”; the latter “noumena” or
“things in themselves”. All we can ever know, Kant thought, are phenomena .... In the middle of
the nineteenth century, the definition of “phenomenon” was further extended until it became
synonymous with “fact” or ‘whatever is observed to be the case. ... When the American
philosopher C..S. Peirce used the term “Phenomenology” he had in mind not only a descriptive
study of all that is observed to be real but also of whatever is before the mind - perception of the
real, illusory perceptions, imaginations, or dreams .... Peirce introduced the sense of the term in
1903.” 10/
That information can be perceived as noumenon is supported by the significations in both
dictionaries for ‘noumenon’. 11/ Again the text is not quoted completely. The OED’s
illustrative quotations are left out as are their sections in [brackets] the etymology.
WEBSTER’S: noumenon ... n. pl -na ....a ground of phenomena that according to Kant cannot be
experienced; can be known to exist, but to which no properties can be intelligibly ascribed ...”
OED: noumenon ... Pl. noumena ...In the philosophy of Kant: An object of purely intellectual
intuition, devoid of all phenomenal attributes. “
Information as a noumenon can indirectly inferred from the Webster and OED significations as
quoted at the beginning of this segment. To directly infer, requires considering both Webster’s
and the OED’s branch I, senses 1, sub senses a thru d, 2 and 3, sub senses a thru c (note sub 3.d is
the mathematical signification; and senses 4,5,& 6 are legal; branch II, sense 7, is considered
obsolete; and branch III. sense 8 is the attributive}. OED Branch I, sense 1 (sub senses a-d) and
2 deal with ‘the action of informing’ whereas branch I, sense 3, sub sense a deals with ‘knowledge
communicated’. 12/ Webster’s sense 1 ‘the communication or reception’ relates to the OED’s
‘action of informing’, in particular its sense “2. The action of informing (in sense 5 of the verb);
communication of knowledge or ‘news’ of some fact or occurrence; the action of telling or fact of
being told something.” 13/ A second aspect of this noumenon is in Webster’s sense 2 sub sense
a ‘knowledge obtained’ and OED’s branch I, sense 3, sub sense a ‘knowledge
communicated’. (It should be noted here that Webster’s refers to the ‘assimilator’ (obtained)
and the OED refers to the instigator (communicated), this is taken up later in the chapter on the
participants in the informational cycle.) A third aspect is found in Webster’s sense 2. Sub sense
d ‘a signal or character’ and the OED’s branch I. Sense 3, sub sense c ‘separated from, or without
the implication of, reference to a person informed’ and ‘that which inheres’ .
Both Webster’s and the OED base their significations usage; Webster’s in its Preface staes: “ ...
The information there set down derives not only from the 10,000,000 citations which were
available to the editors ... but also from the considerably more than 1,000,000 citations collected
5
since the publication of ...” (Assume meant from the seventh, 1963 edition.) The OED states in its
Preface “... Its basis is a collection of several millions of excerpts from literature of every period ...
. Such a collection of evidence – it is represented by a selection of about 2,400,000 quotations
actually printed – ... .” 14/ Both are based on ‘usage’, the significations for ‘information’ with
their illustrative quotations must then, represent the ‘common’ or ‘conventional’ perception of this
noumenon that we have labeled information.
The basic cycle, ‘action of informing’, (instigation of mental construct and assimilation) is
presented in the OED branch I, sense 2: “The action of informing (in sense 5 of the verb);
communication of the knowledge or ‘news’ of some fact or occurrence, the action of telling or fact
of being told something.” 15/ In branch I, sense 3. sub-sense c there is an indication the basic
cycle can be more complex. “c. Separated from, or without the implication of, reference to a
person informed, that which inheres in one ...” (initial cycle) “of two or more ...” (additional
cycles) “ alternative sequences, arrangements, etc., that produce different responses in something,
and which is capable of being stored in, transferred by, and communicated to inanimate things.”
16/ The basic cycle concerns, then, the mental construct is that which is (stored) in the mentalities
of the instigator and assimilator. But when ‘separated from mentality of the instigator when
stored, transferred, communicated, the mental construct (information) becomes a mental/physical
construct.
Webster’s entry for information does not refer to ‘action of informing’ but does state in its sense
1:” the communication or reception on knowledge or intelligence “ A compression of OED’s
branch I, sense 2 and sense 3, sub-sense c. Webster’s entry for ‘information retrieval’ (which
follows the entry for information) relates more to the OED branch I, sense 3, sub-sense c:
“informational retrieval n: the techniques of storing and recovering and often disseminating
recorded data esp. through the use of a computerized system.” 17/ Webster’s is similar enough to
the OED’s so that both can be seen to represent the common, conventional perception of
information; The OED, however, better reflects the scholarly perception.
The OED branch I, sub sense 3.a (‘knowledge communicated’) contains illustrative quotes
followed by a paragraph (?) Which begins with the label ‘attrib’; there appears two quotes the first
of which is: “1890 M.Townsend U.S. pref.{“ (p)” 1 The mass of curious facts, coincidences, and
information items from which this book is evolved.” 18/ (It would seem to this assimilator that
this ‘attrib’ should have appeared at the beginning of the illustrative quotes fot branch III., sense 8
(the attrib sense). What is confusing to this assimilator. Sub sense which follows is declared by the
OED as ‘obs’ : “… b. with an and pl. An item of information or intelligence; a fact circumstance
of which one is told. In earlier use, an account, relation, narrative (of something). obs” 19/
The OED designation is usually accepted as correct, but when one considers the 1890 quote
appearing in branch I, sense 3, sub sense a and the quotes in branch III, sense 8 (attrib sense)
begin with 1922, this assimilator would not consider sub sense b as obsolete
Perception: phenomenon nee noumenon: informational item
Given all of the above it is possible, then, to label the mental/physical construct as ‘an item of
information’ and/or ‘informational item’. And the cycle by which the item is stored,
6
communicated, transferred is the informational item cycle. The OED concept of stored,
communicated and transferred should, however, be expanded: 1) stored - production, re-stored reproduction 2) communicated - accessed searched, accessed researched [to inhere in one (initial
cycle) and in two or more (additional cycles) 3) transferred - distributed. The informational item
and its cycle is taken up in the next segment; It should be noted here, however, that this
mental/physical construct is an entity that exists beyond the mentality of is instigator - it can be
accessed (communicated at different times and places to assimilators who are more likely to
respond than agree; Accessing as viewed by Peckham in his informational item, Explanation
and Power, The control of Human behavior::
“The attribute of signs other than regulatory is generally recognized as “information,” that
is, the instructions on the category of appropriate response. A perceptual field is filled with
information according to the learned ability of the perceiver to respond to the richness or poverty
of the informational aspect of its signs. Commonly, such information is said to be the material for
something called “communication.” Successful “communication” depends upon two factors, the
capacity of the individual receiving the communication to respond appropriately to the
informational aspect of signs and the capacity of the communicator to employ those semiotic
protocols which control the randomness of response, usually referred to as ambiguity. .” 20/
Peckham refers to “A perceptual field” (“is”) “filed with information ... and the richness or poverty
of the informational aspects of the of it signs.” 21/ Accessing, then, maybe more than ‘learned
behavior’ and/or behavioral science. Before the ‘perceiver’ can employ his ‘learned ability’ to
respond to ‘the richness of poverty of the informational aspect of its signs’, there must be provision
of access -search and/or research. It is the ‘communicator’ who is ‘to employ those semiotic
protocols which control the randomness of response.. The provision of access is the
responsibility of informational science and its practitioners of access, because, to repeat from
above, the informational item is an entity which exists beyond the mentality of the instigator and
can be accessed at different times and places by an assimilator who is more likely to respond than
agree. (This assimilator has responded to Mr, Peckham’s communicator as referring to the
practitioner-provider of access and not to the instigator.)
The instigator is concerned with appropriate response (acceptance) , not randomness of respons
Peckham places the responsibility on the assimilator : “ ... the learned ability of the perceiver to
Peckham respond to the richness or poverty of the informational aspects of its signs.” 22/ Indirectly,
however, Peckham indicates that the instigator is an assimilator who has accessed - search and
researched - so as to instruct ‘on the category of appropriate response’.. Unless there has been a
provision of access - search and/or research- the instructing is problematic.
The human mentality has five senses which are utilized to input information into memory, both
conscious and unconscious: sight, sound, smell, taste and touch. The output of that input - from
conscious memory - is assimilated by sight, sound and touch. The resulting informational item and its
cycle has a discernable pattern which can be categorized by the technologies utilized to ‘store, transfer,
communicate’, and also by the identity of the instigator - civilian, governmental, corporate (for profit,
not for profit) and also the instigator’s intention - to tell a story (fiction) or to inform (non-fiction).
There are three types of cycles: transaction (assimilated/instigated, produced/reproduced,
disseminated/distributed and capable of being inserted (provided with points of access) into additional
7
cycles; transfer (produced but not reproduced): or an interaction (oral communication). There can be
variations (three to the third power?). If the cycle is a transfer or an interaction, the ‘interventions’
(produced/reproduced, disseminated/distributed, inserted) will still occur, but not to the same extent as
in a transacted cycle, and not quite so clearly. The pattern of the cycle and the instigator’s identity will
be taken up in another segment.
One last comment concerns the decision of this instigator to use the adjective ‘informational’, e.g.
informational item as opposed to the attributive, e.g. information item. The rationale for this decision
is that the provision of access is an informational science one aspect of which is behavioral science that is those ‘instructions’ which will facilitate the ‘learned ability’. The employment of ‘semiotic
protocols,’ provision of access, to control the semiotic protocols so that the assimilator is able to be
(search/research) informed and is able to accept or respond. The adjective covers both behavior and
provision of access, whereas the attributive refers only to the behavior. Conventional usage, as
indicated by the OED and Webster entries, favors information item. Correct usage is the province of the
linguistic specialist, but to this instigator, informational item is less ambiguous, because it defines a
physical entity (a phenomenon) which is an extension of the human mentalities cognitive facilities (a
noumenon) which can be assimilated at various times and places and by multiple assimilators. The
item, then, becomes an entity ‘independent’ of its instigator and subject to the interpretation and
response of not only the initial assimilation, but also that of additional assimilations over time and
space.
1/Oxford English Dictionary, second edotion,1989,10 volumes. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989,
volume VII, p 944 NOTE: The Introduction states, p xi, “This new edition of … contains the whole
text, unaltered in all essentials of the twelve volume first edition which appeared in 1933 …” (and) “all
of the four volume Supplement …published between 1972 – 1986; …”
2/Webster’s New Collegiate, 1963, 7th edition; 1981, 8th edition, G & C Merriam Company,
Springfield, Massachusetts, U.S.A. 1 volume. NOTE: in the 1963, text is presented as (sense numeral)
“5”, in the 1989, text is presented as (sense numeral) “2.f” p 587
3/OED first edition 1933 Supplement v II 1976 (sense numeral) 3d. p.300
4/Webster’s 1981 (sense numeral& sub-sense) 2f p.587
5 OED Second, 1989, v.VII. p.597
6/OED Second, 1989, v.VII, p.944; Webster’s 1981(sense numeral & sub-sense) 1 and 2 a thru f
p587
7/ - 9/ ibid 6/
10/Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1967 edition, MacMillan, New York. 10 volumes, volume six,
Phenomenology article by Richard Schmitt p?
8
11/OED Second, 1989 v.XVI, p.559: Webster’s 1981, p.779
12/OED Second 1989 v, VII p944
13/Webster’s 1981 p 587
14/ibid 12/&13/
15/OED Second 1989 v.VII p944
16/OED Second 1989 v.VII p 944 NOTE: this sites branch 1, numeral sense& sub sense 3c as
indication of the basic cycle.
17/OED Second 1989 v.VII p.944, branch 1, numeral sense &sub sense 3c: Webster’s 1981 p 587
NOTE: in both sites ‘information retrieval’ is defined with an inference of the basic cycle.
18/OED Second 1989 v.VII p,944 NOTE: branch 1, numeral sense & sub sense 1a – ‘action of
informing’ with quotes one of which is labeled “attrib 1890…”– followed by (with a dagger
indicating ‘obsolete’) 1b “ …an item of information …”
19/OED Second 1978 v.VII p.944, branch 1, numeral sense & sub sense 3b: “atttrib. 1890 M
Townsend U.S. pref.” (p.) “1”
20/Peckham. Morse, Explanation and Power, The Control of Human Behavior, The Seabury Press,
New York, 1979, p.xix, 290pp. p.129
21/ & 22/ ibid 20/