Packages of the start are simply organized: a core text ("of evidences") with some links in each page to core frames, mainly olicognographs; some half a dozen more or less by page. Since them a link to other documents, also purpose visually formated and few minimum text. Qualitative tables may look like interactive, yet they are not. That is not very appropriated to our goal, only to give you an idea of the process we intent. This is all a process and, of course, the purpose is to develop progressively interactivity, introduce a system of query, some basic payment, donation or contributions, to create more packages or for turning able to provide, on one side plastic logical frames that could adapt to your practice and economic provision of information for real humane needs to solve your community's problems.
Mind that many logical frames are already tools for popular organization. Even if some may look like too serious with no excessive reductions they can have a popular version. So get to to the packages (at first only one or two) or one of the method or to the index of packages. Read, explore, link to core frames and from there to documents. Just 3 levels. Give some applied sense to your search and intent to adapt core frame(s) to your purpose and train also a little for preparing to share the management of ideography. Whatever your ambition as a collaborator, train in conceptual flexibility is often enlightening your self understanding.
Think that with much plasticity essential olicognographs have by groups, something in common, cored by main graphs, reshape according your intentions or scientific subject. It is to think that some dozens (say like half a dozen of dozens) can compose a semantic cognitive visual language for democratic management of humane development that could be appropriated by cultures, drive essential knowledge and care humane common universal criteria.
We consider human sustainable development: managing technological features with humane criteria. Other same sort of visual intermediated systems may or will exist. For the moment itseems that we are, with computers, more prone to be received a universal interface of personal computer or, for some, (Linux users) behave as "free open sources programmers"; yet not to reach an interface "wholistically" flexibly adaptable to the kind of real community problems we have, and find some overview information. To develop that we should not be alone and we may be interested by collaboration.
Now for the frame around pages of this website: 6 columns as here may not be perfect; 7 or 8 could be also interesting. But no whole humane register should feel excluded: they can be treated within. For example we think education something more incorporated or deducible, so it has not its' column, but to strongly suggest that any humane enterprise could include relevant learning.
Most systemic has been developed under first order logic for linear computer programming. This seems an important difficulty; without pretending to know exactly how to use them there are emerging alternatives; like 3 or 4 kinds of domain of logic to have in mind for the future of our system. One is boolean programming (binary and/or linear logic): very extended and extending, but determinist with already existing computer complexity; the mainstream of today investigation in computer programming; This is an alternative because the enromous development of capacity of treatment. Another is with multivalued quantum logic in quantum computing. This has also started since a bit less than 2 decades It is far away our formal understanding, but nevertheless we have some questions like about going directly into small graphs of quantic hardware technology and parallel networks and our way to treat knowledge: embeded information. May be there will be at end a "dequantification", like when for ordering various options. Also there is to consider sort of non binary logic, like ternary ones (Post's logic), quaternion and few other cardinal logic. Finally there is also all this research on strange things as fuzzy and neutrosophic logic, artificial neural networks (where our own problem consist in how to mix all that ( of course not for "too hot soap soup").
It is not to show you here that we have intellectual culture but to forsee directions for managing our software problems, in the dream that one day enormous quantities of informations could be manage in a very humanelly and pertinent economical way. Not just as a single small book yet not really interactive.
Also another essential question for us is: does preparing for tomorrow's management of information does not need to change the deterministic and wrong one way of behaving according "pensée unique" as observed like pretending to have itself (latin-way) or "just doing it (anglosaxon-way) while so many other cultures have not this tradition (now running fast to show that they can also do).
In revolution of information it is to observe the extraordinary magic reached by people of these (bubbling) technologies and the sad enormous inflation of bureaucratic information with problems where good solutions seem to have gone so far away, sometimes thanks to globalization. It is also our concern, to mind the sort of plastic interfaces that could help us not to be taken as slaves of determined "information" provided by the "most intelligent machine(s) in the world" ignoring most problems of specification and quantification.
Or should we? - the humanity, just passively waiting for the best things to think and behave according narrow philosophical spectra of universal audiovisual media?
A very practical issue for systemic too. Many registers have developed their own symbolic system of systemic. Some systemics can adsccribe in this register but have not turned yet very popular out their fields of experts. Block diagrams in electronic, Prolog for artificial intelligence. Thermodynamics has a lot to do with but it is still more for physico-mathematical formulation in physics and chemistry, interestingly but yet not very popularly diffused in other serious bioeconomics. In ecology have, for example Odum's symbolic for ecosystem. Many softer sciences have their systemic representation too. We are not so willing to (re)create our one system in "ideography": we know well that it will not be formally really clean but it is our aim to provide some attractiveness to categories proposed here:
Indeed, all are where to target information and for mixing logical formalism. And all may be related to each others: materials have energetic expressions, as has ecology. Ecological cycles of elements in biosphere are well known. Socio-economy is more exclusive (because the way it is done with specialists, hoping that now enough agree that socio-economic systemic needs to be better anchored to real economy. Ideography would have more the purpose of socioeconomic pedagogic - visual - intermediation.
We put some emphasis on interfaces and wholeness. In practice of categories provided there they will not pretend that you cannot have a simple main kind physical state of working but, crossing perspective also concerned within sciences of engineering and the reasons why not just simply: solid, liquid, gas or emptyness. Late one is excluded because in this website for humane practice we are not trying to send anyone in outer space. So the following categories:
- Solid structure
- Solid . gas
- Liquid . gas
- Solid . liquid
- Solid . liquid . gas
And probably they will also have to combine, like for applied engineering sciences. For example, soil geophysics may extend in any solid and environment defined and the kind of development considered, while it is well now that a good soil has enough proportions and not too much of liquid-water and gas-air. Our aim is to reach a "complex environment of your problem adapted to it sustainable answer".
We found following items quite enough, especially considering they can be crossed and combined (2 or 3 times) for more details kinds of integrated development as:
- Urban (with the diversity of human societies needs),
- Industrial (framed by a major branch of activity as districts, eventually with abiotic resources (mineral), commonly the engine of local development and related disturbances,
- Rural in the diversity of activities pooling-poled around a purposedly transformed ecosystem but, with a kind of perspective larger than this one (you may observe some sustainable rural industries),
- Agrarian when mainly focused on the transformation and optimisation of the use of original natural landscape; with biokind of perspective of development (monoculture not being more really sustainable),
- Ecology, considering mainly the managment of main ecosystem, with different purposes.
Considering there to give sense to combination of labels. For example ecology & ecology & ecology may = complete conservationism and exclusion of anthropic activities. Definition of conservationism will stay a local minded specification. Dual combinations may be enough at first: this makes already 25 categories. It is more to take those categories as fields of valid diffusion of information and let good combinations emerge naturally from empirical experiences: "condamned ex-post paradigm".
If we dyslike the sort of resolutions coming from far and very high, like defined policies at worldwide level, there are neverless, not exactly for humane management, kinds of problems that may diffuse or be better understood, with a global overview. While, consistent knowledge at this level is often also the least prone to determinist (out dictating ambitious), and eventually most exposed, at least in our concern, to dramatic non linear effects. See for example climatic events. Scale could have had more ecological system categories, but these are considered with better detail in right column. So:
- worldwide (care),
- continental (often too wide but some countries are almost continental),
- national (often not very humane proxy, but our collective defects are human too). Not to take so simply as logical unit as objective as it could be,
- subnational (or regional) this is for rooted humans economic actors - land inside - the most common geographic unit of projection (many modest actors now have not much more than their "feet and dreams to unfit modern days of their life if not their death, on the roads"),
- local (there are so many different kinds of local governments).
Biological sciences, and others more complicated realsciences can be caught with engineering (top) and ecology (right) or kinds of specified development (top). Our individualistic egocentrism can also be covered with other registers. So human health with a specific register because health of living non human bodies management include death as common ressource while in humans it is commonly seen as something to prematurelly avoid (despite geopolitical policies).
- "problem" (understood as a health problem, including some social problem where health is part)
- "program" (to complete and relate with other categories)
- "people at risk" (in the sense that if illness may concern specialists, health concern as people as possible)
- "body" (not to this website to provide information for doing anywhere "without doctors" but enough for healthy life and understanding of preventive measures)
- "pathology" (in the same perspective as before but may be enough to help in practical approach, including clinics (modern medicine depends enough on technologies for not letting everyone solve their illness problem in a too autodidactic way.
After our perspective, we may provide with inspiring documents at the respect but be this register the one more exposed to mispecification and non consistant speculations; as well as very sensitive to cultural expressions, in the details of applications if not so much on basic values. Cope with this register should mind especially how to diffuse or distribute concept(s) of criteria for helping practical local design of frameworks of actions, duties and activities. This is a wholesome basket and many specialists practising social "sciences" like economist, politologists, geopoliticians, anthropologists may feel dispossessed by our materialistic concern and intent to automated feedback, until they understand that once we will have a functional interactive system of provision of essential information, well connected, to solve technically properly; we can all have an large field for designing sort of ways to provide suggestive "ethical" questions. In short, to interact with people, where they are, locally, when with the system, knowing and respecting their culture. The development of this website, at that level of complexity will indeed need in the future an ethical and committee ...