[Sigia-l] data as information?

[Boniface Lau]

> From: Alexander Johannesen
> 
> > > saying that all IA's treat information as data.
> > 
> > No, I was referring to IAs as a group. That is very different from
> > saying "all IAs". 
> 
> How? What is the difference between the group IAs and 'all IAs' (who
> would by definition be in the group IAs)?

I explained that in the message that you replied to. I suggest you
re-read it and ask for clarification of what I wrote there, if
necessary.


[...]
> > Such distinction is very important because the basis of my comment
> > was primarily the general observation on this list, which is a
> > subset of the IA population.
> 
> But you still haven't applied any kind of proof for this assertion
> either. 

I did that in the form of reasoning in my reply to Eric Scheid in this
thread. Please read that message and also my thread-starting message
"Professional Integrity". If you need additional info, come back for
more.


[...]
> 
> > > and b) because "datum can't be demonstrated" and hence can't be
> > > talked about in any practical and sometimes even abstract way,
> > 
> > May be that is because, for practical purposes, data and
> > information refer to the same thing.
> 
> I'll sort of agree that for practical purposes, they are the same, but
> hey! why even call it data when the theory says it is not? 

Because that is the nature of natural language.

Furthermore, theory is just that, theory. When theory meets reality,
it is reality that counts.


> You're quite keen on telling us (and I'll fold in your latest
> clarifications) that IAs (as a group) treat information as data. Are
> you basically just saying that for practical purposes IAs treat them
> as the same, and that *is* the problem? In that case, *what* is the
> problem? Or better, how is it a problem?

The answer is in my "Professional Integrity" message.


Boniface