Posted by Prac on February 26, 2002 at 14:35:29:

Hi everyone

I need your brains please.

I have been working on a method for deabstracting contexts in order to find the abstract connection between apparently-unconnected (indiscrete)contexts. Don't run away! I'll explain.

For the sake of understanding, I would like to propose a definition of a context as being the description of a subject/domain/topic via the interrelated parts of the relevant domain. I concede other definitions may be as valid as this one, if not more so.

At first glance, one may surmise that one is talking about information engineering or business engineering, and in a sense this is true.

The main difference appears to be that with contexts the information is deeply abstract between contexts, and one cannot assume or derive the contextual cohesion (relationships between contexts) by merely extrapolating or reducing the contexts to further degrees of granularity. In data and information engineering these relationships could be mathematically proven, or strongly suggested via probability.

The value of the approach holds incredible promise for KM, in that knowledge could be specified (abstractly) and connected (abstractly), which could lead to computerized applications for more abstract terms such as innovation, tacit knowledge, judgement, and so forth. The productivity and financial benefits should be apparent and rather obvious with regards to a method such as this one.

The key question remains as to which factors could be identified, and eventually proven reliable and relevant, that constitute the cohesion strength, or affinity, of one context to another.

Data and information engineering cannot be used for this approach, as it typically uses the shared data or information entities (names, keys etc.) to indicate where cohesion exists or not.

Seeing as one is dealing with contexts, and contexts seem to posses the property of being unrestricted in its formulation within its specified environment, commonality, or direct sharing, as a cohesion factor does not seem to work.

At a glance, there appears to be no obvious joining factor(s) between contexts, but similar to social cohesion and information processing within the brain, we do know (somehow) that cohesion does exist, even if apparently totally different neural pathways or actions are followed to create the links between contexts.

My informal research has yielded the unseen properties of cohesion, as found in nature, as being a possible lead to an answer. I do not know how to codify and deabstract such invisible communication (cohesion), which seems to appear often in nature.

An example of the natural factor I am referring to has been observed in the mating dance between scorpions.

It seems, that the affinity of one scorpion for another is clarified via the particular dance steps the female scorpion has to execute once the male grabs her by the pincers. If she appears not know the steps (culture perhaps?), then the male scorpion "apologizes" to her for the inconvenience (so she won't snap off his head), and moves along to look for a compatible female.

It also seems that there may be more than a single factor which contributes to the suitability of cohesion in nature.

I fully concede that this is not altogether an easy question, but anyone with any ideas or suggestions on how to possibly identify the factors, which could occassionally join indiscrete contexts, should feel free to enter into an interesting dialog about this most-interesting subject.

I respectfully request not to ask me for references of published material, as I am not aware of any work being done in this area yet. However, any references to published/unpublished materials or persons would be greatly appreciated.

I hope your minds find this topic as exciting as mine does.

Sincerely,

Prac

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Prac - Diferrentiation between Complex Management and Context Management 10:52:38 02/27/02 (0)
• Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Pete 09:13:07 02/27/02 (6)
  • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Prac 10:30:43 02/27/02 (5)
    • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Pete 05:23:12 03/01/02 (4)
      • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Prac 13:17:26 03/01/02 (3)
        • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Pete 23:41:04 03/03/02 (2)
          • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power Prac 02:53:56 03/04/02 (1)
            • Re: Context Management for Deabstracting KM Power: Stradivari, Silbermann and Steinway Pete 00:56:45 03/05/02 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: