Changes

====3.2.1. Integrity and Unity of Inquiry====

====3.2.1. Integrity and Unity of Inquiry====

One of the very first questions that one encounters in the inquiry into inquiry is one that challenges both the integrity and the unity of inquiry, a question that asks: “Is inquiry one or many?” By this one means two things:

One of the very first questions that one encounters in

the inquiry into inquiry is one that challenges both the

integrity and the unity of inquiry, a question that asks:

"Is inquiry one or many?" By this one means two things:

1.  Concerning the integrity of inquiry:  How are the components and

# Concerning the integrity of inquiry:  How are the components and the properties of inquiry, as identified by analysis, integrated into a whole that is singly and solely responsible for its results, and as it were, that answers for its answers in one voice?  These qualities of unanimity and univocity are necessary in order to be able to speak of an inquiry as a coherent entity, whose nature it is to have and to hold the boundaries one finds in or gives to it, rather than being an artificial congeries of naturally unrelated elements and features.  In other words, this is required in order to treat inquiry as a systematic function, that is, as the action, behavior, conduct, or operation of a system.

    the properties of inquiry, as identified by analysis, integrated

    into a whole that is singly and solely responsible for its results,

    and as it were, that answers for its answers in one voice?  These

    qualities of unanimity and univocity are necessary in order to be

    able to speak of an inquiry as a coherent entity, whose nature it

    is to have and to hold the boundaries one finds in or gives to it,

    rather than being an artificial congeries of naturally unrelated

    elements and features.  In other words, this is required in order

    to treat inquiry as a systematic function, that is, as the action,

    behavior, conduct, or operation of a system.

2.  Concerning the unity of inquiry:  Is the form of inquiry that

If one reflects, shares the opinion, or takes the point of view on experimental grounds that inquiry begins with uncertainty, then each question about the integrity and the unity of inquiry can be given a sharper focus if it is re-posed as a question about the integrity and the unity of uncertainty, or of its positive counterpart, information.

    is needed for reasoning about facts the same form of inquiry

    that is needed for reasoning about actions and goals, duties

    or does each sort of inquiry -- aesthetic, ethical, practical,

    speculative, or whatever -- demand and deserve a dedicated and

    modulation is needed to carry out different modes of inquiry,

If one reflects, shares the opinion, or takes the point of view

Accordingly, one is led to wonder next:  Is uncertainty one or many?  Is information one or many?  As before, each question raises two more:  one that inquires into the internal composition of its subject, or the lack thereof, and one that inquires into the external diversity of its subject, or the lack thereof.  This reflection, on the integrity and the unity, or else the multiplicity, of uncertainty and information, is the image of the earlier reflection, on the facts of sign use.  Once more, what appears in this reflection is so inconclusive and so insubstantial that there is nothing else to do at this point but to back away again from the mirror.

on experimental grounds that inquiry begins with uncertainty,

then each question about the integrity and the unity of

inquiry can be given a sharper focus if it is re-posed

as a question about the integrity and the unity of

uncertainty, or of its positive counterpart,

information.

Accordingly, one is led to wonder next:  Is uncertainty one or many?

To rephrase the question more concretely:  Is uncertainty about what is true or what is the case the general form that subsumes every species of uncertainty, or is it possible that uncertainty about what to do, what to feel, what to hope, and so on constitute essentially different forms of inquiry among them?  The answers to these questions have a practical bearing in determining how usefully the presently established or any conceivable theory of information can serve as a formal tool in different types of inquiry.

one that inquires into the internal composition of its subject, or the

lack thereof, and one that inquires into the external diversity of its

subject, or the lack thereof.  This reflection, on the integrity and

the unity, or else the multiplicity, of uncertainty and information,

is the image of the earlier reflection, on the facts of sign use.

Once more, what appears in this reflection is so inconclusive

this point but to back away again from the mirror.

Another way to express these questions is in terms of a distinction between ''form'' and ''matter''.  The form is what all inquiries have in common, and the question is whether it is anything beyond the bare triviality that they all have to take place in some universe of inquiry or another.  The matter is what concerns each particular inquiry, and the question is whether the matter warps the form to a shape all its own, one that is peculiar to this matter to such a degree that it is never interchangeable with the forms that are proper to other modes of inquiry.

 

Another way to express these questions is in terms of a distinction between

"form" and "matter".  The form is what all inquiries have in common, and the

question is whether it is anything beyond the bare triviality that they all

have to take place in some universe of inquiry or another.  The matter is

what concerns each particular inquiry, and the question is whether the

matter warps the form to a shape all its own, one that is peculiar

to this matter to such a degree that it is never interchangeable

with the forms that are proper to other modes of inquiry.

====3.2.2. Apparitions and Allegations====

====3.2.2. Apparitions and Allegations====