Ed (01)
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I strongly suggest that we stay carefully on the topic that Andreas
> raised. 'Systems engineeering', as an engineering discipline, is about
> _artificial_ things. So its definition of 'system' is constrained to
> such things. While there are certainly "systems" in nature (the
> argument for 'intelligent design'), we don't engineer them, although we
> may analyze them to provide engineering insights. If we waltz off into
> the philosophical question of what a 'system' may be, we have lost sight
> of the objective.
> (02)
Yes, however, system thinking suggests that any system (ie. artificial
system, IT system etc) functions as
part of other systems (ie natural or social ecosystems, for example)
thus, although I agree the focus and emphasis of a discussion may have
to be specified,
it may be useful to consider the relationship/dependence between the two. (03)
An environmental sensor is a kind of system that intefraces with a
natural system, but there are lots of other examples, such as
social networking system must be compatible within social and
organizational systems etc (04)
PDM (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (06)
|