Re: Systems Science • Aleksandar Malečić
Re: Animated Logical Graphs • 21
- Each step on its own, as far as I can follow them, makes sense. You are, if I understand it correctly, trying to figure out something fundamental, the rock bottom reality. When can we expect that results of such a research to become “applicable to more than one of the traditional departments of knowledge”? What kinds of tragedy, disaster, misunderstanding, mismanagement, or failure would/will be preventable by your approach?
The larger questions asked above — interdisciplinary inquiry, the interest in integration, the synthesis of ideas across isolated silos of specialization, and what it might mean for the future — are issues Susan Awbrey and I addressed from a pragmatic semiotic perspective:
- Awbrey, S.M., and Awbrey, J.L. (2001), “Conceptual Barriers to Creating Integrative Universities”, Organization : The Interdisciplinary Journal of Organization, Theory, and Society 8(2), Sage Publications, London, UK, 269–284. Abstract. Online.
- Awbrey, S.M., and Awbrey, J.L. (1999), “Organizations of Learning or Learning Organizations : The Challenge of Creating Integrative Universities for the Next Century”, Second International Conference of the Journal ‘Organization’, Re-Organizing Knowledge, Trans-Forming Institutions : Knowing, Knowledge, and the University in the 21st Century, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. Online.
From that vantage point, what I’m about here is just a subgoal of a subgoal, panning what bits of elemental substrate can be found ever nearer that elusive “rock bottom reality”.
cc: Structural Modeling • Ontolog Forum • Laws of Form • Cybernetics
Pingback: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry