Re: Knowledge Loops (fwd)

[SOPKrules@aol.com]

Del:

Your citations exemplify that the distinctions you have as part of your 
philosophical system are different than the ones I refer to when I mention 
the "loop" that is made up of the four basic human speech acts that lead to 
action:

Request
Promise
Declare Complete
Declare Satisfaction

I do not doubt that you have found success and done much good work with the 
set of methodologies characteristic of the Yourdon, Demarco, Coad, etc., 
philosophies.  I do contend that they are traditional computer system design 
and analysis methodologies that do not include explicitly the four 
fundamental speech acts that humans use to make action happen.  

I recommend an alternate citation:

Authors:  Fernando Flores and Terry Winograd
Title:  Understanding Computers and Cognition
Year:  1986, 1987
Publisher:  Ablex Pub. Corp.

I recommend the following sequence for reading the above text:

Chapters 1, preface, 11, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and the rest in order

There are many other citations, but I feel this is a good start.  The 
methodologies you speak of Del are traditional approaches to computer system 
design and analysis.  The approach using the loop that consists of requests, 
promises, declare complete, declare satisfaction is one in which the basic 
idea is to focus on the human relationships and commitments that occur in a 
process via the loop.  With this focus, the material and data that flow thru 
the process become evident but in the context of human interaction not just 
material and information flows.  There are also a suite of information 
technology tools that can be easily created to support the process design.  
In fact, the maps that are created using the loop become the basic code (not 
traditional code) for the application.

I don't expect this to be self evident.  What I am writing about comes from 
an entirely different set of distinctions than exists in our network.  In 
essence we are blind to these distinctions.

As Dr. Deming helped us to learn, though, empirical knowledge is probable 
only.

Bob  
==========================================================================