Azamat, (01)
Let me challenge, not as a criticism--more as a candidate segue into a
different conversation, something you said: (02)
> Finally, what makes the core mechanism of big systems, if it's nonlinear
>causality, manifested as the feedback mechanisms, or causal loops, positive
>and negative. (03)
I ask: (04)
Where in that world view do you account for, or represent, emergence?
Where does that world view account for life itself, other than, say,
as an emergent property of mechanisms associated with zillions of
chemical reactions? (05)
My own thought is that the very term "mechanism" doesn't belong in
conversations about "systems" which cannot be defined as machines.
That, of course, is another subject, one well worth its own
conversation. (06)
Perhaps I am asking a different question: what are the limits of
ontology engineering as we presently understand and practice it? (07)
JackP (08)
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM, AzamatAbdoullaev
<abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> First, kudos to those who suggested the Ontology Summit topic.
>
> Big Systems, or Systems of Systems, are vitally important to study as far as
> the world is rapidly globalizing, becaming increasingly unpredictable and
> volatile, as well as complex and interconnected.
> It'd be of good use to define some guidlines and general principles to be
> discussed on the Ontology Summit.
>
> Broadly, we see two strands: Systems Science and Ontology of Systems.
> Systems theory considers the world as a complex system of interconnected
> parts.
> The System Ontology views the world as the ultimate megasystem, the
> metasystem of heterogenous systems, the unified whole of parts and
> relations. Then, accordingly, a city is to be viewed as the urban system of
> systems, or networks of transportation, utilities, telecommuications,
> buidings, services, etc.
> The Systems Theory divides the domain into a triple of system, boundary and
> environment, stressing the following features as the common ones: domain,
> structure (elements and composition), behavior (inputs, outputs and
> processing), interconnectivity (structural and functional relationships),
> and functions (processes).
> There are many critical issues needing ontological analysis: how to
> define environment from the system itself; how to determine the boundary,
> what the big systems are; open and closed systems; natural and artifical
> systems, physical and virtual systems, or mixed systems, as sociotechnical
> systems or cyberphysical systems. If they are large-scale nonlinear systems,
> and if all real system are just complex causal systems.
> Finally, what makes the core mechanism of big systems, if it's nonlinear
> causality, manifested as the feedback mechanisms, or causal loops, positive
> and negative.
>
> As an example, following the systems theory, Garry's made a rather
> interesting description of a natural system of wetland, while the
> specialist's analysis is more real, or ontological:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetland. Its about nature, meanings,
> definitions, classifications, properties, interractions, etc.
>
> Azamat Abdoullaev
>
> http://www.eis.com.cy
>
> (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (010)
|