Re: Communication ...

[John M <***>]

Jamie,
funny thing: I had no hesitation when reading you freshly coined "ensemble
paradigm" to acknowledge a good term for the RR-type wholistic (complexity?)
worldview. Then again I have known your vocabulary (did not say: always
understood) for a decade and a half.

I like this term (although maybe Tim does not like my liking it).

Cheerz

John M
----- Original Message -----
From: "James N Rose" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Communication ...


> Tim,
>
> Its a phrase I just came up with as I was writing the post.
> I couldn't think of a word or words to express the notion
> of a 'systems model' .. which conveys a concept that it less
> than a full-blown "paradigm/theory of everything", and yet
> more than de-cried simple 'model' which essentially identifies
> only the forms/physical components of a system or organization.
>
> I thought that 'ensemble paradigm' might give an alternative
> label.  It is meant to specifically help trigger prioritizing
> the presence and role inclusion of dynamic-relations and
> kladistic aspects as co-importantly equal with any grouped
> listing of specifiable forms.  Ensemble here means more than just
> 'collection of ...'.  It hopefully conveys :
>
> All natural systems and sub-designatable systems are multiple
> combinants of forms and of behaviors/performances (both independent
> -and- tied to or commensurable with 'forms').
>
> I've basically used this foundational notion for years,
> and simply generated a convenient language hook. "Model"
> is an over worked and burdened label at this point in
> human usage.
>
> Jamie
>
>
> Tim Gwinn wrote:
> >
> > Jamie,
> > What is an "ensemble paradigm"?
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
>