Lecture
Where is the wisdom lost by us for the sake of knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost for the sake of information?
Philosophy adopted a fairly extensive typology of knowledge. Cover it all difficult. We will focus on subjective (personal) and objective (universal) knowledge.
Subjective knowledge, in our opinion, is valuable information, comprehended, believed, systematized by the subject, useful, significant for him, which has become the inner state of his consciousness (consciousness - shared knowledge) and subconsciousness. Knowledge more to the truth, in contrast to the opinion, which can be both true and false. But the boundary between knowledge and opinion is ephemeral. After all, the opinion mimics the knowledge. Subjective knowledge is actually a complex of opinions derived from the environment (from teachers, books, the Internet, close people, colleagues, as a result of self-study). Such knowledge as a product of thinking and human activity (even if Sir Isaac Newton, a schoolteacher, or an Internet site) may contain delusions and mistakes ("we are all weak, for human beings are the essence"). Therefore, the acquired knowledge is not a "sacred cow" that can be milked, but one cannot encroach on it, especially since knowledge is procedural, changeable, as are changeable opinions. We believe that not a single subject possesses complete knowledge of anything - knowledge is “scattered” (according to F. Hayek) fragments in the opinions of individuals. In this sense, the multiple opinions and fragmentary aggregate knowledge contained in them are the current, intermediate products of the search for truth — the goals of knowledge.
"What is truth?" We allow ourselves to imagine the answer to this ancient philosophical question in the allegorical form of truth as the attracting finger of an impossible dream. The answer to the question about objective knowledge is similar. We believe that Hayek is right - one cannot succeed, no matter how much one wants, to collect fragments of knowledge scattered in subjective opinions, into objective knowledge is one, universal, filled with truths alone. Objective knowledge is an unattainable ideal, an object of philosophical reflection of G. Hegel and his followers. Collective knowledge, even filtered through academic filters and encyclopedias, is in fact the "illusion" of objective knowledge. Therefore, the teacher, as we see it, should not be in front of students, students should fall into aplomb of infallibility, giving them not objective knowledge, but his illusion. After all, even the time-tested mathematical axioms and physical laws, "irrefutable" natural-science and social-humanitarian theories and accumulated experience were refuted or, at best, limited to a narrow scope of their application. This is all the more true for modern times with its rapidly developing information and communication technologies. The caution of didactic judgments suggests itself: "according to modern ideas ...", "according to the name of the name ...", "known experiments have shown ...", "we believe that ...", etc.
The task of any school, in the opinion of many educators and the author, is not to fill the memory of students with knowledge and opinions, but to educate them aimed at good and understanding, independent thinking and curiosity . The latter can be developed not by training, but by self-study: “if you were given an education, then this does not mean that you received it” (Internet banner).
Acquired knowledge is prescription and productive, the main thing is to be able to use it for solving problems and problems. This means that knowledge helps to comprehend "... extrasensory reality, that is, such an objectivity that would be outside of thought itself. Similarly, not the one who knows its axioms and theorems, but who can solve mathematical problems with them, owns mathematics tasks "(A.F. Losev." Passion for dialectics ").
Where is the beginning of the end that ends?
Perhaps, before the lips already born whisper
And in the woodlessness the sheets were circling,
And those to whom we dedicate experience
Prior experience gained traits.
The idea of a priori knowledge, like any fruitful philosophical idea, is inexhaustible and, once having arisen, is doomed to eternal relevance. It was developed most thoroughly by I. Kant, although before him (Anaxagoras, Plato, R. Descartes, GV Leibniz, H. Wolf), and after (neo-Kantians) the idea a priori substantiated many theories of knowledge. Marxists denied Kantian apriorism. Without being locked in the framework of this or that philosophical "ism", we will be guided by the original - Kant's interpretation according to his "Critique of Pure Reason".
Kant postulated a priori knowledge (Kant's object of study was precisely a priori knowledge (as a process), from which a priori knowledge resulted (as a result, a product of knowledge).) As a given of human consciousness and avoided ontological argumentation of a priorism, considering mystical "inborn ideas of" Descartes and " pre-established harmony "Leibniz and deducing his gnoseology from the structure and properties of the knowing mind itself. We are interested in the problem of the genesis of apriorism (conditionally a priori cognogenesis ) in the following formulation: if a priori knowledge is possible, then where does it come from (We are interested in a priori knowledge before any experience — in Kantian understanding, that is, regardless of any experience (outside his), and not from specific experiences, "whom there is no number.")?
Kant's innovative philosophy largely determined the development of modern gnoseology, with the result that the problem of the genesis of apriorism faded into the background (The Kantian a priori problems that took place, as a rule, were methodological without affecting the genetic problem.). However, with the development of evolutionary and genetic epistemology, linguistic philosophy, phenomenology and hermeneutics (Hermeneutics (from the Greek. Hermeneia - interpretation) - a philosophical theory of understanding as a necessary condition of social existence and understanding (interpretation) of texts.) Physics, computer science and physiology, opening the nature apriorism has again become an urgent problem, at least for those philosophers and scientists who accepted the idea a priori. To reveal the direct (if you will, substantial) grounds and possible mechanisms of a priori knowledge is the essence of this problem. We are far from the thought of solving it, our task is more modest - to show that an information philosophy is relevant for penetrating the mystery of the genesis of a priorism.
Assuming any knowledge of the highest, most valuable form of information and putting into the notion of "most valuable form" the semantics of cognitive information, we agree that the knowledge contained in thesauri (knowledge bases) of natural and artificial intelligence is extrastrate, although its carriers can have a quite tangible substrate nature . So, in our physically material world, "gray matter" is the substance, just like film spraying on computer disks. And the energy (chemical, electrical) expended on recording and reading cognitive information is also quite tangible and measurable, as a tangible and measurable signal in the material and energy communication channel. But to feel and measure the knowledge stored by the carrier substance as an unmanifested "thing in itself" through states, properties, functions, the work of the carrier (in particular, the brain) is not yet capable of modern science.
Then what phenomenon and what mechanism associated with it are behind the mutual transformation of the ideal semantics of knowledge on the one hand and its substrate-energetic significance (in the form of signs-codes and signals) on the other hand? Even the medieval philosophers asked: "... the way in which souls connect with bodies is very striking and decidedly incomprehensible to man, and yet this is man himself" (St. Augustine); "... how does a mental impression cause ... a change in the physical and material subject, what is the nature of this connection and the combination of these amazing powers?" (Michel Montaigne). In the "Physics of Information" it is assumed that this problem is an information field problem: knowledge-information and the field, despite their apparent distance from each other, seem to be related, because of all the fundamental physical concepts, it is the field concept that has no visual analogies in reality, the most close to the concept of ideal information (the concept of the physical field gained scientific status only in the XIX century. (M. Faraday). The materialists, who considered physics as their domain, forbidden for idealism, constituted the field to to "a special form of matter" - in our opinion, without proper reason).. With equal grounds, the physical field can be interpreted as a specific (power) form of information, where the power component is secondary, as for the French queen D'Artagnan and his horse were secondary, delivering the long-awaited diamond pendants with known efforts to her (according to A. Dumas).
With this approach, mutual transformations of the ideal and the material (mental and physical, spiritual and physical) are reduced to field interactions, and if in an attempt to find out the nature of a priori knowledge we transform Kant's "what can I know?" in “how can I know?”, then the possible answer will most likely be rested in the information field problem. The latter is now being intensively investigated, however, more deviant than academic science. To solve the problem, it is likely that the borders between physics, chemistry, biology, psychology and physiology will have to be artificially erected by scientists. Probably, it is a very difficult task to investigate extra-sensible objects of the “subtle” information world, which lies beyond the capabilities of modern scientific instrumentation, a world where a traditional observer, questioning (arousing) an object under investigation, does not simply distort his response (reaction), but distorts unrecognizability - up to the complete destruction of the answer. It was not an easy task for J. Piaget, who studied within the framework of psychocogenesis parallelism between progress in the rational organization of knowledge on the one hand and the corresponding psychological (in fact, informational) process on the other hand, for K. Lorentz, who tried to explain the transformation of systems in the framework of biocogenogenesis which are simply repositories of information, in subjects of knowledge, and, finally, for an unknown philosopher of antiquity who had reason to declare: "... born, a person must search and discover what he already knew." In the above aspect, the problem of a priori cogogenesis from the point of view of information philosophy does not look completely hopeless.
Let us begin with the a priori (according to Kant space-time) forms of the sensual contemplation of an object (Kantian "subject"). Kant, postulating, as a priori forms of sensuality, space ("external" feeling) and time ("internal" feeling) as a given , thereby eliminating the contradiction between their own denial of the innateness of these forms, on the one hand, and their rigid prejudging experience, on the other parties. According to Kant, a priori forms of sensuality when contemplating an object are manifested through the grasping of the variety of sensory representations of the subject as "a modification of the soul in contemplation". Contemplation, in turn, takes place only if we are given an object, which as a “thing in itself” has its own diversity, which is only partially manifested (as far as a particular act of knowledge requires) and therefore does not coincide with the diversity of ideas about the object as “things for us". Let us use modern information terminology, replacing Kant's concept of “diversity of ideas” about a subject being contemplated with the identical concept of information diversity, which means that many different states of an information source (Kant's subject), which the subject (consumer of information) contains about the object (source information). In other words, the act of cognition of an object, brought to the subject “modification of the soul” of the subject, is presented as a kind of “intercourse” of the subject with the object, their assimilation and, finally, information identity.
According to the transcendental principle of identity of the subject and object of cognition (FV Schelling), emanating from the unity of nature and spirit, knowledge is a product of the mind, which is laid down and organized by nature in man through the mechanism of "potentiation" - the growth of subjectivity. The objective (real) and subjective (ideal) beginnings of the world are one, and the differences between them are seen by Schelling, developing the ideas of Kant and Fichte, only in the quantitative predominance of one or the other beginning (within the total "amount of a priori knowledge"). Consequently, the evolving nature is not only a priori knowledge, but also encloses its conditions and principles in itself. After all, the development of any object, consisting in its structural and functional change, is impossible without metabolic and informational processes of exchange with the environment, where information processes are reduced to reflection, perception (as a relic of the evolutionary development of nature) and apperception - cognition of the environment. At the same time, scientifically substantiated unambiguous boundaries between mapping, perception and apperception are just as difficult to grasp as between inanimate and living nature, between being and non-being, corporeality and spirituality (whatever philosophers say about this), therefore, it is possible to recognize the metaphysical presumption Schelling, that knowledge is ontologically “spelled out” in nature and is a priori pre-assigned to man.
With its more than two hundred years old, the principle of identity of the subject and object is attractive for modern apologists of the attributive concept of information in that it correlates with the informational interpretation of a priori forms of sensuality and, above all, with the principle of mutual information ("Physics of Information").
Any purposeful activity (and cognition refers to such, even if it is simple contemplation) begins with stimulating information, which sets in motion material and energy and information flows through appropriate signals. The integrated effect of such an impact on an object of activity necessitates a response, which, like an impact, regardless of its energy, necessarily contains an information component (Allegedly, passive contemplation of the object is impossible without an active impact on the object. Visual and radio contemplation require electromagnetic flow reflected from the object, audible "contemplation" - a fairly dense substrate of sound propagation, non-energy information contemplation - a virtual issue object object.). Thus, the impact is reduced to the interaction, which is necessary informational, and according to the principle of mutual information - also symmetrical in the amount of mutual information in a bidirectional (duplex) communication channel "subject-object". At the same time, quantitative symmetry of information does not at all imply (although it does not exclude) qualitative (semantic, value) symmetry. The meaning and value of the quantitatively identical information is generally different for a subject and an object. For this reason (and not only!) The information identity of the subject and object in the act of cognition does not mean (at least for the author) their ontological identity, although, it must be admitted, cognizable truth is, of course, objectively subjective.
If a subject and an object, in particular, a person and nature, mutually know each other, receiving quantitatively equal information in each act of cognition, therefore, an object must have a certain structure, similar to the memory of the subject, in order to store the received information in the form of knowledge. Then it is logical to consider memory as an attribute of being - without memory, no knowledge is possible. Moreover, due to the information interconnectedness, the identity of the knowing subject and the knowable object, this memory can (must?) Be common. Modern deviant physics claims that such a memory exists; the concept of semantic vacuum and semantic field of V.V. Nalimova (Shipov GI. The Theory of Physical Vacuum. New Paradigm, 1993; Nalimov VV. In Search of Other Meanings, 1993.) as a kind of interpretation of the Cartesian "continuum of consciousness", objectifying consciousness and its important attribute - memory .
If we accept such a concept of memory, then the concept of information will have to be divided into two interrelated concepts: internal (related) information (knowledge information) stored in a memory substrate (that is, transmitted in time-space) and external (free) information (message information ), transmitted by the substrate of information interaction in space-time (Here, following the presumption of inseparability of the substances of space and time in information processes, the dominant substrate is used first in the substantial pair ntsiya:. for storage is internal information - time transmission of external information - a space about the external and internal forms of information about memory, see the topic 1 and topic 4 (section 4.4.2))...
The concept of external information manifested in the sign-signal (morphosyntactic) form of dynamic or static messages is close and clear to us with its reality, unlike the concept of internal information, which, due to latency, virtuality of the semantic form of knowledge, encounters powerful opposition from the apologists of information functionalism. But if we deny the existence of internal information in the substance, then, logical reasoning, we should not make exceptions for highly organized brain matter, and, therefore, we must deny the existence of consciousness, unconscious archetypes and mythologized images in it. A similar conflict is characteristic of artificial internal information carriers. If inanimate Rosetta stone, books or computer storage devices store information in all its components: morphological, syntactic and semantic, this information, including its implications, can be used externally, does this not give rise to the premise that the inanimate is peculiar inside information as well as living information - regardless of the degree of organization of what we call substance? The objection that artifacts are materialized products of consciousness, i.e. the inner information of living highly organized matter is unconvincing, because as well as the person creates artifacts consciously, he can do it unconsciously in particular mental states, to which there is much evidence. So why can't unconscious nature do the same? Man has learned how to use electron spin, quantum dots and similar hyperfine properties and structures of the nonliving microworld in artificial information systems ("Information Physics"). Is it possible to say for sure that nature in natural information systems cannot do the same, as all objects in the Universe are, and he himself as a super-complex object? After all, until now we, in essence, only used ready-made recipes for nature that had been pre-existing to us, painfully discovering and comprehending them, sometimes in complete contradiction with the common sense of our consciousness. What is worth one quantum mechanics with its mind-blowing paradoxes! And the deeper we understand nature, the more often our common sense refuses to understand what is known, and delusion turns out to be the closest path to objectively-subjective truths of knowledge (“Misled mind? Diversity of extra-scientific knowledge” / ed. Kasavina IT, 1990).
To recognize only the meaning-making object in the subject (according to external information about the object), rejecting the meaning of the internal information of the object itself, means violating the principle of complementary dichotomous symmetry of philosophical concepts and categories, preferring the subjective beginning to the objective without proper grounds, discarding the principles of mutual information and information identity of the subject and the object, which contradicts the initial premises of not only our discourse.
According to the "Physics of Information" a priori informational entropy depends only on the probability distribution of the states of the object and does not depend on the conditions of experience (the act of cognition). Consequently, a priori entropy is in no way connected with external information in the object-subject communication channel and characterizes only the object, but in what sense? As a quantitative measure of uncertainty (pre-experimental lack of knowledge) of the internal information of an object, there is simply no other meaning. In the same place, a posteriori entropy is interpreted as a measure of unknown in experience (not manifested, unobservable, not perceived) part of the internal information of the object, and the amount of information is measured as a measure of external information of knowledge.
We believe that the above argument does not contradict Kant's contemplation, in which the perception of a material object by the subject is a procedural material-ideal relationship between the independent existence of an object as a “thing in itself” (in the informational context - the independent existence of the internal information of the object), its phenomenon as a “thing for us "(the manifestation of internal information in the external and transmission of the latter), the influence on the subject's sensuality (perception of external information) and the specifics of acclimatizes subject (the specifics of the communication channel "object-subject" and the subject thesaurus).
So, the internal (semantic) information is not observable. Consequently, arguments about it are unverifiable and speculative, as well as about a priori forms of sensuality, physical vacuum, quark, wave function, ideal society, freedom, God, immortality, etc. Forms of existence of unobservable objects of nature and mind are doomed to debatable, however the same science, philosophy and religion operate on them, often not without success. The truth in these discussions is the prerogative of science, but philosophizing is turned to the meaning of the objects under study, and if the meaning of internal information as a goal and the result of its understanding is achievable, then from a philosophical point of view the concept of internal information is entirely appropriate. It is fundamental, i.e. not deducible from deeper concepts, but it can be justified, at least philosophically, through the coherence of all inferences and empirical results achieved under its assumption (Even etymologically in the Latin verbal form of the concept of information (informo - to give a look, give a concept), you can see the external information ("to give the form") and internal information ("to give the concept").).
Internal information is not observable against the background of external information, just as the informational content of a person’s spirituality is not observed against the background of his physicality. But the connection between the mental and the physical through the concept of information is manifested through the law of conservation of information. Thus, the human body "goal-setting" external information of the order, logic, comfort, predictability, limiting diversity, cognition (information trend). Spirituality, in turn, refers to the inner information of freedom (including freedom from order and logic), risk, creativity, choice, growth of diversity (entropic tendency). The vector of goal-setting ( needs, requests ) of a person continuously fluctuates between somatic and spiritual intentions, but according to the law of information preservation, the informational sum of such contradictory human needs is constant and equal to the sum of its physically and spiritually oriented capabilities (resources) . In other words, transcendental relations between the physical and spiritual needs of a person, on the one hand, and his respective a priori possibilities, on the other hand, are governed by the law of conservation of information. With the constancy of the information resource, the growth of one of the needs necessarily leads to a corresponding decrease in the other. This is clearly manifested in art, where the dominant informational (bodily) tendency in recent decades has led to the infringement of the entropic (spiritual) tendency, which is observed in the mass culture with its cult of success, in the dehumanization of art. В свою очередь, экономическая анархия, повседневность риска и непредсказуемость утопических метаний властных структур влекут неизбежный упадок материальной культуры, ущемление телесных потребностей человека.
Подобные взаимоисключающие и одновременно взаимодополняющие информационные тенденции с метафизическим "потенцированием" (по Шеллингу) одной в другую в рамках закона сохранения информации свойственны бытию вне зависимости от его проявлений в сущем – косном или живом, материальном или идеальном, ощущаемом или трансцендентальном, объективном или субъективном.
In the themes "The concept of information as a philosophical problem", "Physics of information" it was noted that transcendental internal information is not energetically destroyed. Only its carrier is subject to destruction, provided that it is material and energy. Then, having repeatedly copied the internal information (before the destruction of its carrier) onto other carriers, it could be saved and transmitted as reproduced copies for an arbitrarily long time. But is the internal information of the object amenable to absolute, exhaustive copying, if the object is informationally inexhaustible? Of course not. Therefore, internal information, if it were copied to external, then only partially, and then there would be a question about the selection mechanism of the copied part and, as a result, about the relevance of the very concept of copying. We believe that among the well-known ontological concepts that could characterize the relationship of internal and external information (these concepts, in addition to copying, we include reflection, replication, phenomenon, transformation, manifestation, sublimation.), Most adequately reflects its essence of the notion of manifestation . Internal information as a symbolic opportunity is manifested in the external as a sign reality (that is, it is partially “by itself” “for us”), like the manifestation of the psyche in an act, look or gesture, the author’s worldview in his speech or manuscript, substance in its radiation, disease in the symptom. External information as a result of development can be reflected, copied, recoded, transmitted, etc. The act of manifestation of internal information in relation to the conscious and the unconscious is the subtle “internal mechanism of action of ideal causes”, from which, in fact, the code transformation in the substrate of the information carrier begins until the “thing for us” - the thought form - becomes “a thing in us "being perceived by the substance of the brain. This mechanism is marginal, as the mechanism of the "boiling vacuum" (Shipov GI), located at the junction of the transcendental (virtual) and observable worlds, is marginal as archetypal experiences are marginal.
The mechanisms for the manifestation of internal information and the reproduction of copies of external information lie in the foundations of the evolution of living matter - in the mechanism of its heredity. In most cases, informational manifestations in living matter are material and energy in nature, which is due to the material and energy nature of biological information receivers (receptors, sense organs). For this reason, in the acts of cognition, man stimulates external information from objects in material and energy form. However, in the "Physics of Information" attention is paid to the unobserved information field, through which, presumably, the information is transmitted by non-power (non-energy) method.
Based on the above, we assume that a priori forms of sensuality do not need to be postulated - they emerged at the early stage of the formation of living matter as manifestations of the inner information of the Universe, containing knowledge of the archetypical spatial-temporal relations between its material objects, and as copies of these manifestations. Since then, these copies have been continuously reproduced by the evolutionary mechanism of heredity. Modern neurophysiology believes that "the general range of connections for most nerve cells appears to be predetermined in advance, and this predetermination concerns those cellular properties that scientists consider to be genetically controlled (Bloom F., Leiserson A., Hofstedter M." Brain, Mind and behavior ", 1988.). Accordingly, the a priori spatial-temporal forms of sensuality, in our opinion, have an information-genetic nature. In this connection, Descartes's" inborn ideas "(mystical according to Kant) are quite relevant in the a priori cognogen like the later concept of C. Jung's archetypes.
The proposed “informational” hypothesis, in essence, reduces one human givenness — a priori forms of sensuality — to another given — the internal information of a person. We tried to show that inside information is the very root from which a priori forms of sensuality grow. To include the proposed hypothesis among those worthy of consideration, it is sufficient to adopt an attributive approach to the concept of information. But the question remains about the origin of the most internal information. In other words, the a priori cognogenesis is reduced to a priori informationogenesis. Regarding the latter, only the following speculative assumptions can be made within the framework of the evolutionary paradigm. Nature has long pre-existed flora, fauna and man. By the time of the formation of consciousness, it has accumulated in its memory (information field) a rich "database" (namely, a database, not a knowledge base), which became the basis for filling the thesauruses of the first biological specimens, including people. This reflection can be continued within the framework of Kant's transcendental logic or Schelling's transcendental idealism with regard to phenomenology, the anthropic principle, the achievements of genetics, cognitive psychology, neurophysiology, etc. But outside of speculative reflection, a priori information genesis is still terra incognita for science and philosophy.
External information as a manifestation of internal information of a cognizable object is encoded and transmitted from object to subject, afflicting the sensuality of the latter (to affix - to bring together the effect on sensuality and bringing it into action.) With its information diversity, partially reflecting the variety of properties and states of the object in space-time. Monotony non-informative. Through the decoding of external information, identical with Kant's "survey of diversity", our sensuality in its characteristic space registers this informational variety of external information.
The results of registration in time are combined into an integral image of an object in an instant (Gestalt) by the brain mechanisms of parallel processing of information, creating a single perceptual field. This is how the Kantian assembly of a variety of representations is carried out - “synthesis of setting” - the forerunner of image association, or, in the language of cybernetics, identification (pattern recognition).
According to Kant, "the synthesis of seizure is inextricably linked with the synthesis of reproduction" of representations in the imagination, i.e. in the field of reason. Synthesis of reproducing ideas about an object causes rational associations of some representations through others and corresponds to the psychological procedure of identifying (identifying) an object — making a decision about assigning it to one of the known classes (including the new, unidentified class). Tsypkin "Fundamentals of the Information Theory of Identification" (1984) adopted a different notion of identification as "determining the structure and parameters of systems from observations" (this is the black box problem known in cybernetics).) ").
This means that identification must be preceded by a special activity of the understanding — a classification that, even before the act of cognition, forms in the subject's memory empirical classes of objects. The reproduction of representations united by the “synthesis of seizure” into gestalt itself is their recollection, which is impossible without memory as a necessary attribute of reason and without empirical classes within which the object is identified.
Classification is a necessary and universal condition of possible experience, because outside of it every object would be identified in every experience as completely new, even if it were the same object. Since, according to Kant, "necessity and strict universality are the true signs of a priori knowledge", the ability to classify is a priori, but it is not sensual, but rational a priori. The fact is that the classification is carried out according to certain rules related to the formation of informational thresholds for detecting and distinguishing classes, and Kant refers to the ability to give rules to reason. The thinking subject is engaged in the classification of his whole life, without which effective knowledge would be simply impossible. But through the mechanism of classification, the a priori rationality is connected with the empiricism of sensuality. Hence, in Kant's "synthesis of reproduction", the a priori of reason is forced to unite with experience, which, apparently, occurred during the early development of human reason and consciousness as a whole. As a result, a priori reasoning beyond all experience, apart from genetically fixed experience, is doubtful.
The identification mechanism operates according to a priori decision-making rules in the face of uncertainty (for Kant, "synthesis of imagination is based on any a priori on a priori principles"). We believe that the nature of this apriorism should be seen in the instinct of self-preservation, for the "information support" of which an adaptive algorithm for identifying cognizable objects genetically formed under conditions of uncertainty. Identification provides the ability of the mind to think an object of sensual contemplation through an integrating judgment, which gives the consciousness a single, unambiguous representation of a cognizable object, unlike other possible objects.
In cybernetic systems, in computer systems of artificial intelligence, adaptive classification, identification (pattern recognition), associative memory structures have long been implemented, and we have no reason to believe that they are fundamentally different in biological and intellectual systems, including the human mind, which has its own genetics .
So, Kant's reproduction in the imagination (identification of an object) is only the first step of the understanding to “recognize in concept”, i.e. to the knowledge of the object, for "all knowledge requires a concept, no matter how imperfect or obscure it is" (I. Kant). The purpose of the "effort of the mind", i.e. knowledge as such, is Kant's "positive knowledge", expanding the boundaries of the world outlook on the basis of joint activities of experienced and inexperienced knowledge in the formation of concepts. Activity, i.e. active knowledge includes not only “erudite” content (concepts, vocabulary) of the subject's thesaurus, but also cognitive procedures for managing this content (searching, filtering and sorting information, inference, etc.). It is these procedures that, following the identification of an object (in the form of an image devoid of substantive details), make up in Kant's mind an abstract "scheme of the rational concept" on the way to understanding the object. The nature of schematic thinking for Kant is hidden. But following the imperative of unity of consciousness in the synthesis of diversity of representations and at the same time understanding the analytical nature of abstract reasoning in the framework of formal logic, Kant proposes a "synthetic" transcendental logic, the subject of which is not so much the formal logical relationship between judgments and concepts regarding the objects being viewed as the a priori laws of reason, reason, and "knowledge based on reason, thanks to which we think things completely a priori." In such a formulation, one cannot do without a substantive assessment, i.e. information value of judgments and concepts for the synthesizing activity of consciousness, aimed at the synthesis of "objectively significant knowledge." The transcendental-logical approach of Kant implicitly constitutes selection (search and selection) of valuable information as the first stage of apperception. Indeed, the cognizing subject schematizes not all sensually synthesized images, but only pragmatically valuable for themselves, based on their actual goals. Accordingly, under the value of information, we follow A.D. Ursul understands the pragmatic relationship between the subject, his purpose and information about the object. Information has the properties necessary for the realization of a goal, and the more properties needed, the more valuable the information. Hence the value of information is the immediate argument of its utility function, which determines the effectiveness of knowledge. It is in this sense that the value of information is a pragmatic attitude. None of the components of the triad "subject - goal - information" cannot be removed, in order not to make the very concept of information value, not to destroy this value, pointless. The value component of information is its meaning. Changing the goal of knowledge changes the value of information, but not vice versa, because the value of information is secondary to the goal pursued by the subject.
The value of information is often measured by the amount of information as a measure of the removed uncertainty. This metric is strictly correlated with the value of external information, because information that does not reduce uncertainty does not have value and is simply not information in the sense of Wiener-Shannon. But the amount of information, firstly, does not allow explicitly selecting information from disinformation and noise, secondly, because of its a posteriori quantitative measure of information is inertial (off-line, delayed), and therefore unsafe for the subject, because its rational mechanisms the selection of information and modifications of the thesaurus begin to work, without waiting for a delayed decision about what was perceived by the subject - information, disinformation or noise. For this reason, we believe that the value metric of information should be a priori, because only an a priori mechanism for selecting information of knowledge can efficiently nourish Kant's synthesis of recognition in the concept. In this regard, attention should be paid to the principle of the "selective value of information" by M. Eigen. Eigen connects the "selective value" of biological information selected as a result of natural selection with the kinetic parameters of the physicochemical processes of interaction of nucleic acids and proteins and, following E. Schrödinger (Eigen M. "Self-organization of matter and evolution of biological macromolecules", 1980; Schrödinger E. " What is life from the point of view of physics? ", 1947.) concludes that biogenesis is amenable to an unambiguous physical justification. At the same time, information is “evaluated” not quantitatively, but “by its ability to reproduce itself.” Based on the Schrödinger-Eigen theory, it can be assumed that the value of intellectual information is indeed a priori, and the nature of this apriorism lies in the human genome as a product of biogenesis, i.e. the apriorism of the value of information is not predestined to man, but genetically self-organized.
Informationally valuable images are abstracted. Abstraction (according to Kant, the "schematization of pure reason") as an information process seems to us a logical interconnected chain of judgments, each of which is initiated by a previous judgment and filters the information contained in it, gradually releasing it from the original information "noise" of the premises (images) in order to maximize identifying the concept (meaning) of a knowable object. According to this definition, a high level of abstraction differs from a low resultant degree of filtering a signal that carries information about a concept. The empirical noise of an image is the noise not only of the communication channel and the receptive feeling, but also the "noise" of the knowable object in the form of random deviations in it which are insignificant from the essential, single from the general, manifested in relation to (in external information) from hidden in the property (internal information ). At the same time, for the formation of a rational concept adequate to an object, the intensity (energy) is not so much a signal or noise separately as a signal-to-noise ratio .
In connection with the above, Kantian schematization seems to us an intuitively unconscious desire of a person to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio, i.e. if possible, free up rational thinking about an object from the associative noise of its image in order to extract a signal that carries information about the latent sense of an object as a goal and the result of its cognition (understanding). In the limit, such a “liberation” should lead to going beyond the limits of rational thinking - to other forms of “intentional thinking”, other in their informational nature.
Abstraction discolor the way the colors of life, but exposes its essence. On the other hand, schematization and figurative thinking probably have a common informational nature, focused on the concepts of objects. Genetically imaginative thinking precedes abstraction, as is the right hemisphere thinking of left hemisphere. But the two hemispheres form one brain, and although they do indeed have specialized functions, they work together, causing a person's amazing adaptability and his extraordinary ability to solve problems. Abstraction and imagery of thinking, patterns and images are manifestations of a single work of the brain aimed at the meaning of knowable objects. This presumption was also expressed by Kant, who knew nothing about genetics (XIX century) and about discovery in the XX century. asymmetries of the brain, but speculatively believing that "thanks to the scheme and according to it, images become possible."
Из изложенного следует, что, схематизируя образ, субъект интуитивно нацелен на максимизацию эффективности познания объекта. Согласно теме 5 рост функциональной и когнитивной эффективности развивающегося материального субъекта имеет асимптотический предел, чего нельзя сказать о его информативности. Налицо информационная экспансия. Феномен информационной экспансии с позиций, внешне весьма далеких от кантовского a priori, указывает на оптимальность чисто информационного познания ( "Информациогенез и самоорганизация" ). Такое познание может инициироваться особыми состояниями познающей системы, далекими от "шумящей" энергетики традиционного познания. Кант во главу мышления возводит "чистые понятия рассудка и разума", а информационная экспансия – "чисто информационные" механизмы. И в кантовском, и в информационном смыслах речь идет об одном и том же – о внечувственном познании, основанном на одной лишь информации, которая хранится и передается еще непознанными до конца структурами и механизмами и через ценностный отбор трансформируется в свою квинтэссенцию – знание. И все же чистое внечувственное познание вне всякого опыта представляется сомнительным. Опыт, давно повлиявший на геном человека, был необходим.
So, Kant's a priori is interpretable in terms of information. But the foregoing only lifts the veil over the informational nature of a priori (on) knowledge, especially in view of the achievements of modern science. Genetic information, a priori informational genesis, quantum teleportation, self-organizing and self-learning mechanisms of thesauri strongly require unbiased informational research. It is necessary to examine more closely both the a priori rational, responsible for rational (discursive) knowledge, and the a priori rational mind, oriented to rational (integral) knowledge. And these are fundamentally different forms of knowledge. Kant's apriorism is inexhaustible for the philosophy of information and philosophy in general, which cannot be limited only to the information perspective. It remains to admire the vision of the great thinker,did not know about the achievements of science of the XIX-XX centuries, but largely anticipated them.
Reason reflects discursively in an abstract-logical form, therefore scientists and philosophers (often in one person), engaged in discursive knowledge, primarily investigated the logic of thinking and the abstract-mathematical thinking associated with logic.
Логика и математика – предметы исследования логического позитивизма (логицизма, неопозитивизма, логического атомизма) – самой ранней, романтической стадии аналитической философии. Вдохновленные достижениями Г. Кантора, Г. Фреге и Д. Пеано в математической логике, Б. Рассел и А.Н. Уайтхед с ее помощью строго доказали, что вся математика выводится из символической логики, а математическое мышление – не что иное как манипуляция символами согласно предписанным правилам, наподобие шахматной игры. Для этого Рассел и Уайтхед – основатели логического атомизма – вначале "арифметизировали" математику, а затем уже редуцировали арифметику к так называемым атомарным логическим терминам ИЛИ, НЕТ, ВСЕ, НЕКОТОРЫЕ, где два последних – логические кванторы всеобщности и существования. Если математика – символическая логика науки, то всякое научное понятие, суждение и умозаключение, облеченные в математическую форму, должны согласно логическому атомизму подвергаться дедуктивному анализу на предмет их истинности или ложности.
In the natural desire of the scientist to the scientific validity of his theory, Russell came to the conclusion that it is necessary to logically analyze any statements, because only through linguistic structures and conventions (agreements) a thought containing truth or false becomes the property of knowledge. As a result, a Russellian theory of descriptions arose, the basic concepts of which were the objective meaning (reference) and the meaning of sentences and phrases (these concepts first appeared in the works of the German mathematician G. Frege). Frege and Russell understood the meaning behind the external logical form of the sentence and the meanings of its constituent phrases as the meaning of the logic. The search for this reality through the relationship of the meanings of phrases was, according to Russell, the task of philosophy. Logic, in turn, was responsible for the correctness of this search, i.e. for the correctness of scientific evidence. The truth or falsehood of sentences must be determined by science. In this sense, philosophy and logic, philosophy and mathematics, philosophy and science meet in an analysis of the reality behind the grammatical form of sentences. At the same time, the analysis of the meaning should be methodically a reduction converging to irreducible atomic sentences (by analogy with the reduction of abstract action operators to basic algorithmic structures in programming). So, logic explores the correctness of evidence, science is the truth of the provable, philosophy is the meaning of the provable through the reduction of molecular (complex) sentences to atomic ones. Molecular sentences get their logical value (true, false) and, therefore, the value of the atomic sentences that generate them. The controversy of the last statement for us lies in the Russell disregard of the systemic property of emergence ("Information genesis and self-organization."), Which, however, was described in the general systems theory (L. Bertalanffy), which appeared several decades later of logical positivism.
Russell concluded that many of the errors of metaphysics are due to "bad philosophical grammar", and hoped that the new logic would allow them to be detected and, possibly, corrected. The attempts that have been made, however, led to the famous Russell's antinomial machine in analyzing asymptotically infinite classes of “things” and real numbers. Russell opened the Pandora’s Box, finding that the number of contradictions in mathematical and formal logic could be immense. We must pay tribute to B. Russell - he considered the problem of inconsistency of logic in the transition from the discrete reality of finite sets to the continual virtuality of infinite sets as an intellectual challenge that requires an answer, the rejection of which would be a sign of scientific weakness (Continuous) as a brainchild of the theory of fuzzy sets L Zadeh appeared later (1965).). Russell created several theories to solve this problem (zigzag theory, size restriction theory, type theory), which, however, did not save logical atomism. The search for atomic sentences carrying reliable a priori knowledge always leads to tautology, for only tautologies are axiomatic. All other statements are probabilistic or metaphysical in nature, depending on whether there is experience (reality, external consciousness) or idea (consciousness itself) behind them. From the system of a priori tautologies, it is possible to derive another system of tautologies - nothing more.
A way out of the impasse was seen in the first half of the twentieth century. in the analysis of language (linguistic philosophy) and verification theory (L. Wittgenstein, M. Heidegger, M. Schlick, R. Carnap, etc.). It was believed that all philosophical problems are generated and can be resolved in the same way as logical paradoxes are generated and resolved - through the generation and overcoming of a wrong understanding of the logic of our language. Philosophical meaning is inexpressible through cognitive sentences; the essence of things cannot be expressed, it can only be "silently shown in experience"; language is only a verbal image of reality (by analogy with its graphical image in a drawing or an image of an object of measurement in a measuring instrument). As a result, the philosophical problem of the axiomatic knowledge-basis is reduced to the scientific problem of “meeting” knowledge with reality to achieve “the joy of finding”, “a sense of finality”, but not the joy (feeling) of truth, because from the point of view of truth (falsehood) all scientific statements are hypotheses. Philosophy is not a science: "... it is not written anywhere that the Queen of Sciences herself should be a science" (M. Schlick). This concept explores the primary, still purely phenomenological idea of incompleteness of logic and the limitations of a priori reasoning.
The corollary of the ideas of logical analysis of language was the theory of verifiability of R. Carnap, according to which the field of meaningful is exhausted by empirically verifiable scientific proposals. Under metaphysical conditions, there is no place for metaphysics: there is simply nothing to be said. Everything that is cognizable metaphysically, is actually vacuous, insignificant, because it is not verifiable by criteria of truth. According to the verification theory, the experimentally factual proof of the statement with the help of the so-called "protocol" sentences is sufficient for its axiomatization. However, let us say that although some experiments (facts) may confirm a statement, there will always be a case of unconfirmation, for example, if the theory goes beyond the scope of applicability of the
продолжение следует...
Часть 1 6 Knowledge as the highest form of information
Часть 2 Reasonable knowledge - 6 Knowledge as the highest form of
Часть 3 - 6 Knowledge as the highest form of information
Comments
To leave a comment
philosophiya
Terms: philosophiya