Directory:Jon Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry Driven Systems : Part 2 - Revision history

Jon Awbrey: update

2013-10-04T18:00:51Z

update

Show changes

Jon Awbrey: update

2013-06-28T21:11:16Z

update

Show changes

Jon Awbrey at 19:01, 25 June 2013

2013-06-25T19:01:14Z

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ Format List

2012-10-24T19:54:56Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: Format List <ol style="list-style-type:lower-alpha">

Show changes

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ format table

2012-10-21T05:42:38Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: format table

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ format table

2012-10-21T05:00:19Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: format table

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ re-format table

2012-10-21T04:56:50Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: re-format table

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ fix typo

2012-10-20T22:56:40Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: fix typo

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */ format table

2012-10-20T22:52:22Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension: format table

Jon Awbrey: /* 2.1.3. The Formative Tension */

2012-10-17T22:00:46Z

2.1.3. The Formative Tension

@@ Line 6,558: / Line 6,558: @@
 </div>
 ----
 [[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]

@@ Line 814: / Line 814: @@
 An attempt to synthesize the materials and the schemes that are given in Tables&nbsp;5 and 6 leads to the alignments of capacities that are shown in Table&nbsp;7.  I do not pretend that the resulting alignments are perfect, since there is clearly some sort of twist taking place between the top and the bottom of this synthetic arrangement.  Perhaps this is due to the alterations of case, tense, and grammatical category that occur throughout the paradigm, or perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the relationships through the middle of the Table are more analogical than categorical.  For the moment I am content to leave all the paradoxes intact, taking the pattern of tensions and torsions as a puzzle for future study.
-<pre>
+<br>
-Table 7.  Synthesis of Alignments
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+{| align="center" border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; width:60%"
-|      Formal       |          Formative          |
+|+ style="height:30px" |
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+<math>\text{Table 7.} ~~ \text{Synthesis of Alignments}\!</math>
-|     Objective     |        Instrumental         |
+|- style="height:40px; background:#f0f0ff"
-|      Passive      |           Active            |
+| <math>\text{Formal}\!</math>
-|     Afforded      |  Possessed   |  Exercised   |
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Formative}\!</math>
-|      To Hold      |   To Have    |    To Use    |
+|-
-|    Receptivity    |  Possession  |   Exercise   |
+| <math>\text{Objective}\!</math>
-|   Potentiality    |          Actuality          |
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Instrumental}\!</math>
-|      Matter       |            Form             |
+|-
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+| <math>\text{Passive}\!</math>
-</pre>
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Active}\!</math>
 Due to the importance of Aristotle's account for every discussion that follows it, not to mention for the many that follow it without knowing it, and because the issues it raises arise repeatedly throughout this work, I am going to cite an extended extract from the relevant text (Aristotle, ''On the Soul'', 2.1), breaking up the argument into a number of individual premisses, stages, and examples.

@@ Line 772: / Line 772: @@
 The style of this discussion, based on the distinction between possession and exercise that arises so naturally in this context, stems from a root that is old indeed.  In this connection, it is fruitful to compare the current alignments with those given in Aristotle's treatise ''On the Soul'', a germinal textbook of psychology that ventures to analyze the concept of the mind, psyche, or soul to the point of arriving at a definition.  The alignments of capacites, analogous correspondences, and illustrative materials outlined by Aristotle are summarized in Table&nbsp;6.
-<pre>
+<br>
-Table 6.  Alignments of Capacities in Aristotle
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+{| align="center" border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; width:60%"
-|      Matter       |            Form             |
+|+ style="height:30px" |
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+<math>\text{Table 6.} ~~ \text{Alignments of Capacities in Aristotle}\!</math>
-|   Potentiality    |          Actuality          |
+|- style="height:40px; background:#f0f0ff"
-|    Receptivity    |  Possession  |   Exercise   |
+| <math>\text{Matter}\!</math>
-|       Life        |    Sleep     |    Waking    |
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Form}\!</math>
-|        Wax        |         Impression          |
+|-
-|        Axe        |    Edge      |   Cutting    |
+| <math>\text{Potentiality}\!</math>
-|        Eye        |   Vision     |    Seeing    |
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Actuality}\!</math>
-|       Body        |            Soul             |
+|-
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+| width="33%" | <math>\text{Receptivity}\!</math>
-|       Ship?       |           Sailor?           |
+| width="33%" | <math>\text{Possession}\!</math>
-o-------------------o-----------------------------o
+| width="33%" | <math>\text{Exercise}\!</math>
-</pre>
+|-
 An attempt to synthesize the materials and the schemes that are given in Tables&nbsp;5 and 6 leads to the alignments of capacities that are shown in Table&nbsp;7.  I do not pretend that the resulting alignments are perfect, since there is clearly some sort of twist taking place between the top and the bottom of this synthetic arrangement.  Perhaps this is due to the alterations of case, tense, and grammatical category that occur throughout the paradigm, or perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the relationships through the middle of the Table are more analogical than categorical.  For the moment I am content to leave all the paradoxes intact, taking the pattern of tensions and torsions as a puzzle for future study.

@@ Line 750: / Line 750: @@
 <br>
-{| align="center" border="1" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; width:80%"
+{| align="center" border="1" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; width:60%"
 |+ style="height:30px" |
 <math>\text{Table 5.} ~~ \text{Alignments of Capacities}\!</math>
@@ Line 757: / Line 757: @@
 | colspan="2" | <math>\text{Formative}\!</math>
 |-
+| <math>\text{Objective}\!</math>
-<math>\begin{matrix}
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Instrumental}\!</math>
-\text{Objective}
+|-
-\\[4pt]
+| <math>\text{Passive}\!</math>
-\text{Passive}
+| colspan="2" | <math>\text{Active}\!</math>
 |-
 | width="33%" | <math>\text{Afforded}\!</math>

@@ Line 771: / Line 771: @@
 |-
 | width="33%" | <math>\text{Afforded}\!</math>
-| width="33%" | <math>\text{Posssesed}\!</math>
+| width="33%" | <math>\text{Possessed}\!</math>
 | width="33%" | <math>\text{Exercised}\!</math>
 |}

@@ Line 742: / Line 742: @@
 ====2.1.3. The Formative Tension====
-The incidental arena or informal context is presently described in casual, derivative, or negative terms, simply as the ''not yet formal'', and so this admittedly unruly region is currently depicted in ways that suggest a purely unformed and a wholly formless chaos, which it is not.  Increasing experience with the formalization process can help one to develop a better appreciation of the informal context, and in time one can argue for a more positive characterization of this realm as a truly ''formative context''.  The formal domain is where risks are contemplated, but the formative context is where risks are taken.  In this view, the informal context is more clearly seen as the off-stage staging ground where everything that appears on the formal scene is first assembled for a formal presentation.  In taking this view, one is stepping back a bit in one's imagination from the scene that presses on one's attention, getting a sense of its frame and its stage, and becoming accustomed to see what appears in ever dimmer lights, in short, one is learning to reflect on the more obvious actions, to read their pretexts, and to detect the motives that end in them.
+The incidental arena or informal context is presently described in casual, derivative, or negative terms, simply as the ''not yet formal'', and so this admittedly unruly region is currently depicted in ways that suggest a purely unformed and a wholly formless chaos &mdash; which it is not.  Increasing experience with the formalization process can help one to develop a better appreciation of the informal context, and in time one can argue for a more positive characterization of this realm as a truly ''formative context''.  The formal domain is where risks are contemplated, but the formative context is where risks are taken.  In this view, the informal context is more clearly seen as the off-stage staging ground where everything that appears on the formal scene is first assembled for a formal presentation.  In taking this view, one is stepping back a bit in one's imagination from the scene that presses on one's attention, getting a sense of its frame and its stage, and becoming accustomed to see what appears in ever dimmer lights, in short, one is learning to reflect on the more obvious actions, to read their pretexts, and to detect the motives that end in them.
-It is fair to assume that an agent of inquiry possesses a faculty of inquiry that is available for exercise in an informal context, that is, without being required to formalize its properties prior to their use.  If this faculty of inquiry is a unity, then it appears as a whole on both sides of the "glass", that is, on both sides of the imaginary line that one pretends to draw between a formal arena and its informal context.
+It is fair to assume that an agent of inquiry possesses a faculty of inquiry that is available for exercise in an informal context, that is, without being required to formalize its properties prior to their use.  If this faculty of inquiry is a unity, then it appears as a whole on both sides of the &ldquo;glass&rdquo;, that is, on both sides of the imaginary line that one pretends to draw between a formal arena and its informal context.
-Recognizing the positive value of an informal context as an open forum or a formative space, it is possible to form the alignments of capacities that are indicated in Table 5.
+Recognizing the positive value of an informal context as an open forum or a formative space, it is possible to form the alignments of capacities that are indicated in Table&nbsp;5.
 <pre>
@@ Line 760: / Line 760: @@
 </pre>
-The style of this discussion, based on the distinction between possession and exercise that arises so naturally in this context, stems from a root that is old indeed.  In this connection, it is fruitful to compare the current alignments with those given in Aristotle's treatise ''On the Soul'', a germinal textbook of psychology that ventures to analyze the concept of the mind, psyche, or soul to the point of arriving at a definition.  The alignments of capacites, analogous correspondences, and illustrative materials outlined by Aristotle are summarized in Table 6.
+The style of this discussion, based on the distinction between possession and exercise that arises so naturally in this context, stems from a root that is old indeed.  In this connection, it is fruitful to compare the current alignments with those given in Aristotle's treatise ''On the Soul'', a germinal textbook of psychology that ventures to analyze the concept of the mind, psyche, or soul to the point of arriving at a definition.  The alignments of capacites, analogous correspondences, and illustrative materials outlined by Aristotle are summarized in Table&nbsp;6.
 <pre>
@@ Line 779: / Line 779: @@
 </pre>
-An attempt to synthesize the materials and the schemes that are given in Tables 5 and 6 leads to the alignments of capacities that are shown in Table 7.  I do not pretend that the resulting alignments are perfect, since there is clearly some sort of twist taking place between the top and the bottom of this synthetic arrangement.  Perhaps this is due to the alterations of case, tense, and grammatical category that occur throughout the paradigm, or perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the relationships through the middle of the Table are more analogical than categorical.  For the moment I am content to leave all the paradoxes intact, taking the pattern of tensions and torsions as a puzzle for future study.
+An attempt to synthesize the materials and the schemes that are given in Tables&nbsp;5 and 6 leads to the alignments of capacities that are shown in Table&nbsp;7.  I do not pretend that the resulting alignments are perfect, since there is clearly some sort of twist taking place between the top and the bottom of this synthetic arrangement.  Perhaps this is due to the alterations of case, tense, and grammatical category that occur throughout the paradigm, or perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the relationships through the middle of the Table are more analogical than categorical.  For the moment I am content to leave all the paradoxes intact, taking the pattern of tensions and torsions as a puzzle for future study.
 <pre>