[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

Re: Communication ...



I just used google to confirm a recollection: there is an entire body of literature on *ensemble theory*, and, if memory serves, Jamie's use of "ensemble paradigm" correctly suggests such a theory. I agree with his explanation here. I got into ensemble theory while "thematic vagabonding" off a paper that RR wrote that I found at a college library. There really are lots of other ways to skin the same cat!

Cheers,
Jack

James N Rose wrote:

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