|
Post by Worldquest on Dec 26, 2011 17:35:47 GMT
I would like to know what are the arguments are for and against.
|
|
Bayes
Full Member
Posts: 206
|
Post by Bayes on Dec 29, 2011 17:53:47 GMT
I don't understand the question. Could you elaborate please?
|
|
|
Post by Magilla on Dec 31, 2011 3:58:04 GMT
OK, DNA is a complex chemical, and in part, its base-pair triplets correspond to the sequences of amino acids in protein products. This correspondence means that DNA is information. In broad terms, DNA holds information which makes you look a little like your mother, a little like your father, and a lot like you. Of course the full story is much more involved than this.
|
|
rns
Newbie
Posts: 19
|
Post by rns on Apr 21, 2012 18:49:35 GMT
"Information, in its most restricted technical sense, is a sequence of symbols that can be interpreted as a message." ^according to this definition, unequivocally yes, DNA is information. For the reasons magilla explained. There are no (valid) arguments against this, as this is common knowledge.
"Conceptually, information is the message (utterance or expression) being conveyed." ^according to this definition, not necessarily, since it makes the information subjective.
i.e. the information only really exists in a context. For example a thesis on a subject could be deemed as valuable information to one person, but for another person, who may not speak the language in which the thesis was written, it is seen as utter gibberish.
|
|