Friday, January 27, 2006
[148] ß [parallel discussion on
generative methodology (Judith Rosen)
[147] ß [parallel discussion on
generative methodology (Peter Krieg)
[368] ß [comment on four issues
(Richard Ballard)
[150] ß [Deeper discussion between
Judith Rosen and Peter Krieg on relationalism
Four Issues about Ontological
Modeling
Communication from Paul Werbos à [367]
Remark:
Some government funded “ontologists” have standard presentations that
1) assert that progress in information systems is attributed to a specific paradigm
2) that this paradigm will lead to better and better information systems
In both cases, the assertion is challenged by an objective review of the nature of Information Technology and IT procurement practices. ()
Page 9 from one of Dr. Leo Obrst's presentations
A number or terms, such as “expressive logics”, “intelligence”, “knowledge”, “semantics”, “ontology”, “interpretation”, and “complexity” are used in a technical sense that is not consistent with normal human usage nor grounded scientific literatures.
An alternative view is grounded in scientific literatures and in general systems theory. The alternative paradigm is not consistent with the standard paradigm, because foundational assumptions about the nature of computing and the nature of reality are different. (see for example: [150] )
It is important to realize that a fair competition of ideas has not been in place in information science and computer science. A monopoly is maintained by government peer review practices () that are self-selective so as to placed on federal funding peer review panels only those who support hegemony for the current monopoly. The BCNGroup Inc, based on new legislation, is challenging these peer review panels. The new “false claims” legislation covers the case where an industry, corporation or individual makes consistent “false claims”; and these false claims are then used as a basis for receiving federal money.
The Second School of Semantic Science has its founding in a proactive description of a natural science, in an scientifically grounded opposition to the entrenched First School of Semantic Science.
Our primary purpose is in developing a K-12 curriculum () supporting the new science.
The Second School viewpoint leads to a proposal to radically reduce federal funding for current academic computer science. Because many computer science PhDs are very narrowly educated; it is also felt necessary to transition university faculty from computer science to a natural science.
Knowledge science is a natural science based on recent advances in cognitive quantum neuroscience, behavioral science, general systems theory.
Due to the well understood limitations of Hilbert mathematics and first order logics; the new science requires an extension of the foundations of mathematics. Many of the founders of the second school believe that the extension of mathematics can come based on the Rosen definition of complexity.
There are adequate open questions to support exciting PhD thesis and exploratory work.
A poll of recent PhDs in computer science shows that these individuals do not have a grasp of foundational work in behavioral and cognitive science. A review of academic programs shows that in cases where the PhDs are in bioinformatics, the individuals do not have sufficient course work in the natural science of biology, chemistry or physics. As a consequence, bioinformatics generally approaches information science about biological knowledge in a way that is inconsistent with the Rosen definition of “natural system”.
() ß Click here to see NSF proposal to use Python as a basis for a K-12 curriculum in computing science.
The BCNGroup has since 1993 advocated a national, federally funded, program to establish the knowledge sciences as an academic discipline. The development of a peer-to-peer service oriented infrastructure is proposed () as well as academic centers () using advanced linguistic techniques () to serve as virtual communication centers between groups of scholars working on the Knowledge Sharing Core ().