ONT Re: Information = Comprehension x Extension -- Discussion
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
ICE. Discussion Note 47
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Now it's a general rule of thumb that the rules of thumb that are involved
in changing anything have a high degree of overlap with the rules of thumb
that are involved in creating that thing in the first place. If you think
that's one too many thumbs, then it's probably just the way of a recursive
rule of thumb to weigh in with the illusion of an occasional supernumerary
nudge, if not a virtual force that's altogether supervenient in its effect.
The application of this recursive heuristic to our immediate circumstances
leads us to anticipate that the same broad rubrics will turn up red-handed
when it comes to the dynamics of paradigm shifting as we find perpetrating
the pre-conceptions of pre-conceptual frameworks at their initial creation.
Let me try to say that another way.
Abductive reasoning, the form of reasoning that we find
most significantly involved in the initial formation of
concepts and theories, is the form of reasoning that we
find most significantly involved in their developmental
dynamics, the more radical the change or development of
the concepts or theories in question the more pivotally
will abductive reasoning function in the transformation.
In physical anatomy, "abduction" is an action of drawing away (as a limb)
from a position near or parallel to the median axis of the body, or else
a moving apart (of similar parts of the body) [Webster's]. For example,
abductor muscles are those that we use to lift our legs to take a step
forward or those that we use to pivot our eyes toward something that
we spy in our peripheral vision.
There's a lesson in that.
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o