Correct me if I am wrong but all this sounds like class A post- modernist Bullshit to me.
Did you generate this crap using an online PM essay generator or are you just a nut-case? On Sep 22, 11:39 pm, chreodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The human mind attempts to seek & maintain the various ecologies upon > which it must rely. Of course, this means multi-goal orchestration in > lieu of numerous shifting contextual backdrops. The repertoire of > established sensibilities - or library of acquired acumen (FES), spell > out the relative impetuses of the system's "efficacious capabilities." > Integral to all of these ongoing & somewhat protean processes, is the > acquired ability to achieve reliable & viable FOCUS: Our model > achieves focus via the implementation of an OCTAHEDRAL MATRIX. As we > present the various "level one" operative cyber-system concepts - > which are, by necessity of "semantic carriage," nebulous, archetypal, > ubiquitous "primitives," we engage the octahedral matrix to facilitate > this need. > > The structural dynamics of this 'platonic' allow for eight legitimate > "families" of holistic and complementary perspectives to be > entertained. The more "perspectives" the cyber-system is able to > entertain, the greater the reliability, in theory, of the established > sensibilities. Moreover, it should be noted that all the system > concepts that comprise any focus make up three sets of complementary > dialectics - NOT oppositional or "Hegelian," as oppositional > dialectics are meant to be considered only at the cognitive level and > not the meta-cognitive. >>A good example of misplaced oppositional > dialectics can be reviewed in C.H. Waddington's book, "Tools for > Thought." >>>As a further aside, we feel compelled to assert that this > is in NO way to be seen as a criticism of this man's wonderful, ground- > breaking contributions to the science of systems analysis & theory. > The dialectics he established for the mechanical review of "Moral > Philosophy" were understandable, given his pioneering status, and this > book should be seen as one of the "primers" for anyone seriously > considering investigations of system behaviors. Our adulation for this > great thinker could take up a whole post, but perhaps at a later time > - we're sure that those acquainted with his writings, would concur. > > For brevity's sake, I encourage anyone interested to review our blog's > entry that's entitled "The Pivotal Role of Epistemology" in which an > example of "level one" complementary dialectics , i.e., process & > structure, are displayed at the end of the entry. Check out "Time to > Think" athttp://collectiveintellect.blogspot.comthis should give you > a foundational understanding of "focus," as we explore the > "COIAS" (see my last discussion thread) referred to as Recursive > Dimensional BOUNDEDNESS, or "RDB." LATER, TJM --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
