main index

P00: frame around

P01: olicognography

P03: infrastructures

wayout:contact

User

You?
Use?
Perspective?
Usage?
Concern

Graph Start

Core n
Half complex graph

OLICOGNOGRAPHY'S HUMANISM

System

Engineering

Development

Scale

Health

Social

Scale Unit Range

Unit

Anything to quantify or qualify in relative terms implies a level of unit to consider. With complexity in mind, economy should care more meaningful essential unit and intermediate constructions that could effect or affect their identity (make things essential to one's life and consider risks of the sort). This together with the modesty to recognize that, anyhow, we cannot reach perfect definition(s). Election of unit(s) is not so neutral, because immersions and relations. Effects in reality will never be exactly specific neither without affect. Intention or purpose may be so: colateral. If you mean: nothing but your objective, you will miss even this. With some purpose or goals and your frame treat it around essential unit cares your goals, helps to design program more compatible and reasonable to yours.

Whatever the ambition of your goals: essential community, body or human being, help you find more reasonable ways to fill your goals or more easy to discover satisfying sustitute(s). Indeed make your unique world the word money (or benefit) as most and firms do, looks like not a perfect essential unit. Today any business goal seems not to have more than to justify any waste, just saying the magical formula: "I found something to increase profit!". Goal(s) types can be a purpose with others, since a more basic unit like: "what I (essential unit) I could do for you?" will not necessary exclude interest, neither that you should get in non essential goal(s) of others. Quite often it s just better to stay anonymous, do not waste any opportunity to do well for others, cooperative and helpful, and caring to be fair with your own business.

Any society or system carry some evidences about good units, but they are often wrongly defined for ignoring others, communities or indviduals when not designed against them. That could have been tolerated when spaces of development could separe: one people moving to other area, at best without harm (even if history is more used to the contrary: still the debate to know when War has started). Today human technological development have shown that rather than fighting against each others, more fruitful can be to fight with engineering problems. Today free spaces for "genuine civilized development" are tending to disappear. Today has expanded hugelly the potential range of conception and effects of adverse effects, while neither locally neither globally we have shown perfect skills for mastering complex development. This extension of potentiality may make us send devices in the space (ending as garbage), geopolitical absurdities and terrorist reactions, well accross borders. But today also some flavour exists of common Earthwide community. Be all them a bit better shared and managed, combining more properly individual concern, family purpose, groups efforts, social values, and humane care.

Interfaces

It is to balance essential unit with a wholistic view on environment and universe of means where acting and interacting. Caring essential things so could look like both utilitarist and socialist. The point is: if we have to care about what we mean with utilitarism, be it of social type (social utility) with means made of inviduals commitment. Or, as in a mirror: be it individual (individual utility) with social means, without harm to anyone. In both case there are values that can be positive or negative. For negative example: ideologies have made, under powerful individual interpretations of what was social utility, "personality-cult prone monsters" but not so different are the "best free riders gaining from speculating and pushing to disaster public or social assets". Or positive: seriously participative flexible democracy is or should be economically much stronger than forced passive ones. (But they are also exposed to more complexity of diversity, so much efforts are needed to cope better with).

To see things, to understand potential with a fundamental position as intermediate experience and intelligence are useful, but place in time and space, not just within are too. Observer position is better in intermediate one, especially where interface, area of exchange and some insight can operate. On values and with units, it is to care where switches, transformations, regime (speed change), discontinuities are. If there are natural or careful managment can potentially be made or cared. Not to pretend where and how they could be accumulated artificially. There are enough natural discrepancies, diversity and potential care of natural disequilibrium, while the more potential ones, could well be technological ones. It is also to care that everyboy can follow, unless if expected fragmented society to be recurrently chaotically instable.

Some points to mind :

Micro-Meso-Macro

Micro has been defined as lower approach scale, and Macro as upper approach scale. Middle was often implicit, macro or micro supposed to explain, make middle missing link: prove reductions and jump to "everything is like these reductions". Many mistakes have resulted of that; straight line are often met only with harsh constraints, goals for whom? - unfair successful. Purpose for what? - inflate loosers.

Operations made simple, complicated aggregation or disaggregations hardly considered. Of course, force them to be complicated as you like, can be a reduction: holism is often esoteric. Wait-see-Do, Care-we-Mean. From down to up approach, generalization have often been simplified, assumptions poorly checked and "up" made too simple. Up to down, distributions have been cut swept away humanity. The remain of the days before - nimby way?

Unit defined, simply labelled, not moved, out moved average. Intermediate unit setted a meso level, its base poorly considered. We have mentioned the interest of logarithm for that: negative before-zero at one-positive after. Meso has been filled with empirical methods and diverse things, developed because reduction(s) did not satisfied enough and macro did not achieved. But was micro for satisfying or what is macro achievment? May be just illusions? Meso composed of individuals, groups, directly calling closed relations behaviors. Too often behind general cause explanations, be them the norm of the average humans (non existing when not wrongly calculated) or explained by a something global, sometime an holism too generally determined.

Some suggesions:

... back to index