Changes

All in all, a RIF involves the close coordination of an OF and an IF, plus mechanisms for carrying out the so called ''reflective operations'' (ROs) that go to negotiate between the objective and the interpretive realms.  The work of ROing permits processes of interpretation, initially taking place largely in the IF and impinging on the OF only at isolated points, to be formalized and objectified, thereby becoming segments of the OF.  Taken over time the cumulative effect of this ROing motion gradually turns more and more of the IF into new sectors and layers of the OF.

All in all, a RIF involves the close coordination of an OF and an IF, plus mechanisms for carrying out the so called ''reflective operations'' (ROs) that go to negotiate between the objective and the interpretive realms.  The work of ROing permits processes of interpretation, initially taking place largely in the IF and impinging on the OF only at isolated points, to be formalized and objectified, thereby becoming segments of the OF.  Taken over time the cumulative effect of this ROing motion gradually turns more and more of the IF into new sectors and layers of the OF.

Point 27.

'''Point 27.'''

There is a portion of reasoning that consists in drawing distinctions, signifying the features thereby distinguished by means of logical terms, recognizing constraints on the conjoint occurrences of these features, expressing these constraints in the form of logical premisses, and then drawing the implications of these premisses as the occasion warrants.  This part of logic, in its formalizable aspects, is generally referred to as ''propositional calculus'' (PropC), ''sentential logic'' (SL), or sometimes as ''zeroth order logic'' (ZOL).

There is a portion of reasoning that consists in drawing distinctions, signifying the features thereby distinguished by means of logical terms, recognizing constraints on the conjoint occurrences of these features, expressing these constraints in the form of logical premisses, and then drawing the implications of these premisses as the occasion warrants.  This part of logic, in its formalizable aspects, is generally referred to as ''propositional calculus'' (PropC), ''sentential logic'' (SL), or sometimes as ''zeroth order logic'' (ZOL).

With any system of logic, at least, that does not propose a purely syntactic rationale for itself, it is necessary to draw a distinction between the logical object that is denoted, expressed, or represented in thinking and the logical sign that denotes, expresses, or represents it.  Often one uses the contrast between ''proposition'' and ''expression'' or the shade of difference between ''statement'' and ''sentence'' to convey the distinction between the logical object signified and the syntactic assemblage that signifies it.  Another option is to let the division lie between a ''position'' and a ''proposition'', with the suggestion being that the function of a symbolic proposition is to indicate indifferently a plurality of logical positions.  In accord with my personal preference, I use the term ''proposition'' ambiguously, expecting context to resolve the question, and resorting to the term ''expression'' when it does not.

With any system of logic, at least, that does not propose a purely syntactic rationale for itself, it is necessary to draw a distinction between the logical object that is denoted, expressed, or represented in thinking and the logical sign that denotes, expresses, or represents it.  Often one uses the contrast between ''proposition'' and ''expression'' or the shade of difference between ''statement'' and ''sentence'' to convey the distinction between the logical object signified and the syntactic assemblage that signifies it.  Another option is to let the division lie between a ''position'' and a ''proposition'', with the suggestion being that the function of a symbolic proposition is to indicate indifferently a plurality of logical positions.  In accord with my personal preference, I use the term ''proposition'' ambiguously, expecting context to resolve the question, and resorting to the term ''expression'' when it does not.

'''Point 28.'''     Adequate reasoning about the propositional constitution or the sentential representation of POVs and PODs requires a logical system that can work with ''higher order propositions'' (HOPs).

Point 28. Adequate reasoning about the propositional constitution or the sentential representatation of POV's and POD's requires a logical system that can work with "higher order propositions" (HOP's).

Point 29.

'''Point 29.'''

Finally, interlaced with the structures of the OF and the IF, there is a need for a structure that I call a "dynamic evaluative framework" (DEF).  This is intended to isolate the twin aspects of process and purpose that are observable on either side of the objective interpretive divide and to assist in formalizing the graded notions of directed change that are able to be actualized in the medium of a RIF.

Finally, interlaced with the structures of the OF and the IF, there is a need for a structure that I call a ''dynamic evaluative framework'' (DEF).  This is intended to isolate the twin aspects of process and purpose that are observable on either side of the objective interpretive divide and to assist in formalizing the graded notions of directed change that are able to be actualized in the medium of a RIF.

----

----