There are natural systems thatexist in nature.
"natural systems" are said o be such by observers and as such a human-made too. The distinction is very useful, but the way it is expressed is problematic. It's risky to speak of "systems" from a positivistic standpoint.
Logic is a set of principles that form a framework for correct reasoning
I would say "useful" as a matter of general convention, rather than "correct" since "correct" would imply some pre-given criteria for correctness while "criteria" and "correctness" are only human ideas and conventions.
Correct, according to?
And then, something which is correct for FOL won't be for multi-valued logical systems or for the calculus of indications.
several proof-of-concept implementations
What about Dialogue Mapping?
For conciseness here, I call this model a "discourse graph", since the graph encodes discourse relations between statements, rather than ontological relationships between entities.
Why discourse relations are not ontological relations?
For example, CiTO is an ontology and has relations such as:
- [agrees with](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e100)
- [cites as authority](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e134)
- [cites as data source](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e152)
- [cites as evidence](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e170)
- [cites as metadata document](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e189)
- [cites as potential solution](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e207)
- [cites as recommended reading](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e225)
- [cites as related](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e244)
- [cites as source document](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e262)
- [confirms](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e321)
- [contains assertion from](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e339)
- [corrects](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e358)
- [critiques](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e394)
- [derides](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e413)
- [disagrees with](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e449)
- [discusses](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e468)
- [disputes](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e486)
- [gives background to](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e541)
- [gives support to](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e556)
- [has citation characterization](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e572)
- [has cited entity](https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e585)
sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html#d4e649) - is agreed with by - is cited as authority by - is cited as data source by - is cited as evidence by - is cited as metadata document by - is cited as potential solution by - is cited as recommended reading by - is cited as related by - is cited as source document by - is cited by - is confirmed by - is corrected by - is credited by - is critiqued by - is derided by - is described by - is disagreed with by - is discussed by - is disputed by - is refuted by - is retracted by - is ridiculed by - is speculated on by - is supported by - provides conclusions for - provides data for - provides excerpt for - provides method for - refutes - replies to - retracts - reviews - ridicules - speculates on - supports
Already we can begin to see certain themes that are related to nature’s resilience:DecentralizationRedundancyDiversityAdaptability
See Requisite Inefficiency in https://essentialbalances.com
What does it look like to design a system for survivability?
Is that a good idea? Death is functional. Survival leads to growth leads to consumerism leads to suffering. [[Luc Hoebeke]] made a great keynote on that topic at this year's [[Metaphorum]] (conference on management cybernetics).
Here's the link to the video of the presentation part but it's was PechaKucha, 7min; the interesting things happened in the next 50 min of dialogue)
Is survival the purpose of any living system? - Or is survival only a temporary condition for life? - Human systems are different J. Vickers “Conscious of their death” - Is the purpose of a “human” system what it does “with this consciousness”? paraphrasing S. Beer <br /> - Survival as purpose of human systems creates pathological autopoiesis Fear of death expressed in growth, exploitation, the other as enemy - Human pathological systems focus mainly on means to avoid the unknown end: extrapolation as argumentation to mobilize means in economical, political, ecological, health discourses - Healthy human systems have a purpose transcending their own survival: System 5 has a metasystemic purpose being part of a whole learning place and time of the system, it identifies, in the whole - Risking consciously a mutation instead of changing the system? Cybersyn as failed mutation and learning experience? Taking the risk of dying peacefully? As individuals, communities, institutions?
According to Haggard Hawks (on twitter and on their website), huffle-buffs is “an old Scots dialect word for worn out, comfortable clothes”. As worn out, comfortable clothes are my favourites, this particular term stuck in my daily usage as soon as I came across it.
And confirmed by [[Susie Dent]] Having Words with Susie Dent - Radio Show
It's no longer editors and producers who have background to do this, it's my conspiracy theory uncle. And that's the fundamental challenge that we're facing.
Why should anyone control it? Does a producer control Wikipedia and Wikipedia was given as an example of something that works exceptionally well.
On the one side is the human mind, the source of every story, theory and explanation that our species holds dear. On the other stand the machines, whose algorithms possess astonishing predictive power but whose inner workings remain radically opaque to human observers.
transparent but understanding only the simple vs working with huge amount of parameters (possibly dealing with complexity) but opaque
Like inventive electricians rewiring a house, scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have reconfigured newborn ferret brains so that the animals' eyes are hooked up to brain regions where hearing normally develops.The surprising result is that the ferrets develop fully functioning visual pathways in the auditory portions of their brains. In other words, they see the world with brain tissue that was only thought capable of hearing sounds.The findings, reported by Dr. Mriganka Sur and his colleagues in the April 20 issue of Nature magazine, contradict popular theories on how animal brains develop specialized regions for seeing, hearing, sensing touch and, in humans, generating language and emotional states.
[[Mriganka Sur]]