SUO: Re: Doctrine Of Individuals
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Robert,
I am slowly chewing my way through the e-messes
that I loaded on my plate three or four days ago.
I have been dimly conscious of one or two echoes
in your messages that seem to resonate with stuff
I think about a lot, especially the "rudiments" --
no disparagement there, it's just the way that
an old-time drummer tends to think about things --
namely, the aspects or the elements of category
theory, ontomorphisms versus onto-morphisms,
quotients, and such-like abstract nonesuch.
So far, unfortunately, I have not been able
to pin down anything definite to say about it.
But this last note rang through slightly clearer
to my understanding, so I am hoping that I can
get that far through my io-box by tonight or
tomorrow.
In the meantime, some of what you say about
formal concepts and formal contexts reminds
me of the approach that I am trying out in
my ever-ongoing dissertation work, where I
have laid out the designs for a variety of
three-layered pragmatic templates that are
called, in order of increasing specificity:
1. Objective Frameworks (OF's),
2. Objective Genres (OG's),
3. Objective Motifs (OM's).
This stuff can be found at the Arisbe website:
http://www.door.net/arisbe/
http://www.door.net/arisbe/menu/library/aboutcsp/awbrey/inquiry.htm
You may wish to look at the part of the text that begins with
"Subsection 1.3.4.12: Objective Plans & Levels", to see if there
is anything there that rings a bell. (Note: This was the first
piece of HTML that I ever tried and I had to use the preformatted
option in order to preserve the set-off displays and tables and such.
Also, you may have to punch <increase-font> a few times to read it.)
By the way, whatever settings you are using on your composer
do not allow me to quote your text when I try to reply ...
Talk to ya later,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤