Mutual Redundancies in Inter-human Communication Systems: Steps Towards a Calculus of Processing Meaning

TL;DR

This paper extends Shannon's communication theory to account for meaning in inter-human communication by defining mutual redundancy, exploring its properties, and interpreting it through social systems theories.

Contribution

It introduces the concept of mutual redundancy as a measure of surplus meaning in reflexive communication and generalizes it to N dimensions, linking it to social theories.

Findings

Mutual redundancy equals mutual information in three dimensions.

In even dimensions, the sign of mutual redundancy differs from mutual information.

The framework connects information theory with social systems and meaning processing.

Abstract

The study of inter-human communication requires a more complex framework than Shannon's (1948) mathematical theory of communication because "information" is defined in the latter case as meaningless uncertainty. Assuming that meaning cannot be communicated, we extend Shannon's theory by defining mutual redundancy as a positional counterpart of the relational communication of information. Mutual redundancy indicates the surplus of meanings that can be provided to the exchanges in reflexive communications. The information is redundant because based on "pure sets," that is, without subtraction of mutual information in the overlaps. We show that in the three-dimensional case (e.g., of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations), mutual redundancy is equal to mutual information (Rxyz = Txyz); but when the dimensionality is even, the sign is different. We generalize to the measurement in N dimensions and proceed to the interpretation. Using Luhmann's social-systems theory and/or Giddens' structuration theory, mutual redundancy can be provided with an interpretation in the sociological case: different meaning-processing structures code and decode with other algorithms. A surplus of ("absent") options can then be generated that add to the redundancy. Luhmann's "functional (sub)systems" of expectations or Giddens' "rule-resource sets" are positioned mutually, but coupled operationally in events or "instantiated" in actions. Shannon-type information is generated by the mediation, but the "structures" are (re-)positioned towards one another as sets of (potentially counterfactual) expectations. The structural differences among the coding and decoding algorithms provide a source of additional options in reflexive and anticipatory communications.