Directory talk:Jon Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry Driven Systems

Fragmata

Arisbe Site, "Inquiry Driven Systems", 30 Jun 2000	IDS, Draft 8.2
Arisbe List, "Inquiry Driven Systems", 05 Jan 2002	IDS Drafts 8.69 – 8.70
Ontology List, "Principle of Rational Action", 20 Jun 2002	IDS 3.2.9, 10 Jun 2002, Draft 8.75
Inquiry List, "Reflective Inquiry", 13 Apr 2004	IDS 3.2
Inquiry List, "Higher Order Signs", 24 Nov 2004	IDS 3.4.9 – 3.4.10
NKS Forum, "Higher Order Signs", 24 Nov 2004	IDS 3.4.9 – 3.4.10
NKS Archive, "Higher Order Signs", 24 Nov 2004	IDS 3.4.9 – 3.4.10
NKS Printable, "Higher Order Signs", 24 Nov 2004	IDS 3.4.9 – 3.4.10
Inquiry List, "Recurring Themes", 17 Dec 2004	IDS 1.3.10.3 – 1.3.10.7, 16 Dec 2001
Inquiry List, "Language Of Cacti", 13 Dec 2004	IDS 1.3.10.8 – 1.3.10.13, 06 Jan 2002
NKS Forum, "Language Of Cacti", 13 Dec 2004	IDS 1.3.10.8 – 1.3.10.13, 06 Jan 2002
NKS Archive, "Language Of Cacti", 13 Dec 2004	IDS 1.3.10.8 – 1.3.10.13, 06 Jan 2002
NKS Printable, "Language Of Cacti", 13 Dec 2004	IDS 1.3.10.8 – 1.3.10.13, 06 Jan 2002

Symbol Sandbox

Default : < > < > < > < >

Courier : < > < > < > < >

Fixedsys : < > < > < > < >

Pmingliu : < > < > < > < >

System : < > < > < > < >

Terminal : < > < > < > < >

LaTeX \[< >\] \(< >\!\) \(\lessdot \gtrdot\)

\[\begin{matrix} (\ ) & = & 0 & = & \mbox{false} \\ (x) & = & \tilde{x} & = & x' \\ (x, y) & = & \tilde{x}y \lor x\tilde{y} & = & x'y \lor xy' \\ (x, y, z) & = & \tilde{x}yz \lor x\tilde{y}z \lor xy\tilde{z} & = & x'yz \lor xy'z \lor xyz' \end{matrix}\]

X_j = P_j ∪ Q_j ,

P = ∪_j P_j ,

Q = ∪_j Q_j .

\[\begin{matrix} X_j = P_j \cup Q_j , & P = \bigcup_j P_j , & Q = \bigcup_j Q_j . \end{matrix}\]

Notes & Queries

JA: I'm in the process of merging and reconciling two slightly different versions of this paper, but it may be the end of the summer before I can finish doing that. Jon Awbrey 09:48, 29 May 2007 (PDT)

Jon, your content soars way over my head, but I am nonetheless delighted that you're using Centiare so effectively (if at least to get #1 Google search results for inquiry driven systems — even though that's currently not happening … Google's a bit quirky as it digests our site and "learns" where to put us in the rankings). I hope that you can keep up the effort, and that we can help you from an operational standpoint. MyWikiBiz 13:26, 29 May 2007 (PDT)

JA: Thanks for the interest, and I've been "pleased as punch" with the environment so far, mostly for reasons independent of the SEO factor — the quality of the working environment is more important to me than any need to corner the market in a given subject area. As far as I know, I coined the term "inquiry driven system" back in the (19)80's — though I know as soon as I say that, it will turn out that C.S. Peirce scooped me by a century or so — anyway, it's already the case that 90% of the stuff on the web about inquiry driven systems was written by yours truly. On the other hand, when my Centiare user and directory pages depose my Wikipedia user and discussion pages from the top of the Google heap, that will be the test case for me! Jon Awbrey 14:36, 29 May 2007 (PDT)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! Someone from Missouri visited this page today as a result of this search. — MyWikiBiz 11:57, 13 October 2008 (PDT)

What do you know, it is the "Show Me" State, after all … Jon Awbrey 12:06, 13 October 2008 (PDT)

Furthermore, someone from New York City visited the page today, via a #1 search result on Yahoo! for system inquiry examples. Congratulations, again! — MyWikiBiz 06:29, 23 October 2008 (PDT)

Propositions And Sentences : Residual Remarks

Where are we? We just defined the concept of a functional fiber in several of the most excruciating ways possible, but that's just because this method of refining functional fibers is intended partly for machine consumputation, so its schemata must be rendered free of all admixture of animate intuition. However, just between us, a single picture may suffice to sum up the notion:

|   X-[| f |] ,  [| f |]   c   X
|   o       o   o   o   o      |
|    \     /     \  |  /       |
|     \   /       \ | /        | f
|      \ /         \|/         |
|       o           o          v
|   {  %0%    ,    %1%  }  =  %B%

Why are we doing this? The immediate reason — whose critique I defer — has to do with finding a modus vivendi, whether a working compromise or a genuine integration, between the assertive-declarative languages and the functional-procedural languages that we have available for the sake of conceptual-logical-ontological analysis, clarification, description, inference, problem-solving, programming, representation, or whatever.

In the next few installments, I will be working toward the definition of an operation called the stretch. This is related to the concept from category theory that is called a pullback. As a few will know the uses of that already, maybe there's hope of stretching the number.