SUO: Inquiry Driven Systems
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Inquiring Minds, Wherever Ye May Find Yeselves,
On-&-off-list animadversions with Tim King and Jack Park
have reminded me of a polymorphous theme that was in my
mind at the time when I returned, after a longish spell,
to my doctoral studies, with the idea of taking up what
we commonly, if diversely, call "intelligent systems",
but to take them seriously as dynamic-al systems.
In previous work, I had formulated the notion of
an "inquiry driven system" (IDS), as a species
of the genus "intelligent dynamic system" (IDS),
and I knew that I would follow the general lines
of the pragmatician's "theory of inquiry" (TOI),
but beyond all that most of the details were pretty
much up in the AIR (artificial intelligence research).
Tim King and I, after he was incited by my recent allusions
to "intelligent systems engineering" to question my omission
of what he thought ought to be the critically disambiguating
hyphen in my title to the work, have diverted ourselves with
considering the "resonance interchange bond" (RIB) that finds
itself constituted by an eigen-vacillation between two phases:
1. intelligent-systems engineering
2. intelligent systems-engineering
But I would not have bothered to distract you all with this
cheap but weak form of entertainment -- that is, if it were
not for the most compelling and vivid dream that chanced to
visit me just last night, all about the missing link or the
outside chance of a tertium quid, the upshot of which I may
henceforth style as follows:
3. i - s
\ /
e
What this mystical diagram is supposed to signify I have n-ary a clue,
but I thought that I might share it with this community of inquiry in
the hopes of gleaning a novel and hitherto unsuspected interpretation.
Jack Park and I, now that he sees himself intrigued, if not ensnared, by the
entanglements of what we SUOphists call a "category", ontologically speaking,
with what mathematicians call a "category", abstract non-sensically speaking,
are about to embark, although he does not know it yet -- till now! -- on the
study of what I call "analytic differential ontology" (ADO), just as quickly
as I can make up, in accord with these entitlements, the rest of the subject.
Given this conjoint influence -- since having a couple of others to blame,
as every e-cute analyst soon discovers, much relieves the anxiety thereof --
I find myself e-boldened to revisit these antic themes of my yesteryears,
and so you, too, now know who it is whom you may hold e-countable for it!
But Next Time,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤