[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much for your wonderful essay-post, dearest sister in Christ!

There, Rosen identifies Shannon's theory as a syntactical model.

Of course! Shannon's mathematical model of communications does not need to entail anywhere near as much as Rosen's in answering the question "What is Life?"

But without it, there would be no model for the "chasing" in Rosen's model. Actually, Rosen implies as much by his appeals to Turing et al.

[betty boop]

Of course! Shannon's mathematical model of communications does not need to entail anywhere near as much as Rosen's in answering the question "What is Life?"

Totally agreed. Shannon's model is about effective or "successful" communication that reduces uncertainty in the receiver. Where I suspect this may fit into the Rosen picture is on the question of how does an efficient cause realize its effect on a material cause — under the "auspices" (so to speak) of a formal cause globally moving the system towards a final cause (not in this context a reference to teleology)?

I do recall that somewhere in Rosen's relational diagrams there's some "chasing" going on. The fact is, however, I don't now recall the details of Rosen's argument.

Please give me a page cite, dearest sister in Christ? I'd like to revisit that very much. I think that's key to understanding of how Shannon Communication Theory "dovetails" with the Rosen theory.

Intuitively, I think it does. [Hypothesis: To actually be effective, the efficient cause ("sender") depends on "successful communication that reduces uncertainty in the receiver" (i.e., the material cause.)]

Thank you ever so much for your thought-provoking essay/post, dearest sister in Christ!