Information and Meaning

In THE ECOLOGICAL APPROACH TO VISUAL PERCEPTION,Gibson (1979) argues that we live in a world overflowing with information. The environment is so filled with information that if we had to consciously process all of that information, it would jam (sensory overload) the brain and we wouldn't be able to perceive (or think about) anything. How then do we derive meaning from the information we are exposed to?

Several years ago, I started working on this question, and the answer I came up with is summed up in GIRM (the Generative Information Reciprocity Model). GIRM divides the human world into three parts: a perceiver, an environment (or information array) as a whole, and an environment (or information array) divided into parts. Perceivers are able to perceive parts and wholes based in part on culture (what is emphasized culturally to notice), genetics (what has been hardwired into our brains to notice in order to increase survival), and prior knowledge (what we know from experiences and learning). A whole has an information value of its own. Parts also have information values ascribed to them. The information in parts and in wholes becomes clearer, more defined, and more refined from contrasting the information in each. Contemplation of the information carried in parts and wholes increases the knowledge carried in the perceiver engendering new interpretations of the information carried in the parts and wholes. There seems to be an endless cycle of interpretation and reinterpretation; an eternal hermeneutic circle. The passage of time ensures that the perceiving organism and the world around it change, and thus that new information is always available.


Yet, what stops this endless cycle from continuing forever? Why don't people just stand around for incredibly long periods of time processing all of this information abundance? There seems to be several answers to this. First, Zipf (1949) proposed the Principle of Least Effort. The gist of this theory is that people have a natural inclination to making the least amount of effort possible and still achieve a goal. We know that people who are extraordinary--great thinkers, successful businessmen, great painters, star athletes...--go beyond least effort. Yet, only rarely are certain people motivated to make maximum effort (and this usually only in one small area).

Second and related to the first, motivation. What incentive, reason, goal... motivates someone enough to make the extra effort? Survival has become relatively easy. It's fairly easy to find a job, make and support a family, entertain one's self, get food... It doesn't seem necessary to think deeply about these things. Japan has an amazing cultural phenomenon. People there are trained from a very early age to exalt the average. People want to be average, not better than average. People are happy being average, and feel stressed out when told they are not average. Not surprisingly, Japan is also infamous for its lack of originality and creativity. Innovative? Yes! Creative? No.

So there are potentially hereditary and cultural reasons why people don't generate meaning endlessly from the information around them. The question that truly interests me is whether we can design information environments that encourage people to spend more time generating meaning/reflecting and thinking about how to make a better world. I believe it is possible, but how is a topic for another essay.