Operational III

Month, Day: 166, Might, Loftiness (Glory)

Earlier mentions touched upon topics of concern (The Operational, Ontology from Honour, Operational I, Operational II, Understanding, to name a few).

A particular juxtaposition is very much apropos, yet problematic. For instance, we know that the Manifestations have influenced Creation, including us, periodically through time. Related to that is a Viewpoint that knows. Yet, at the same time, we're to discover our own knowledge.

To a certain extent, that is. As, from the twin duties framework, it's clear how to obtain the proper basis. But, that approach has no hint about things operationally specific, such as that required for technical knowledge.

So, we have seen an increasingly robust set of knowledge, named science, that has no end point and that, to those who are honest, leaves a lot of holes all around. How one fills those holes is very much of interest here, not so much from a judgmental sense as from comparative analysis.

Say what? Some ways are more effective toward achieving goals than are others. For that matter, some are better at stating what is known and at describing goals, in the sense that many solution attempts are strengthened by adequate statement of the problem that is being solved.

So, do we find ourselves at a point where an accumulative set, that is very large, of knowledge diverges from what it might be with some insight into Creation? How many times do we see some model become the focus rather than the reality behind it?

That latter is an example map-territory problem that seems to be rampant nowadays, exacerbated by the success with computational approaches.

SAQ #35: The foreknowledge of a thing is not the cause of its realization ... For example, tonight everyone knows that after seven hours the sun will rise, but this general foreknowledge does not cause the rising and appearance of the sun ...

Firstly, knowing in advance is possible, yet somehow limited. No one gets that free ride. Secondly, many things can be modeled, yet the model can never approach the reality. How do we characterize, and utilize, what is suggested there?

Remarks:

11/21/2010 -- What motivates, indeed.

10/11/2009 -- Will, an operational imperative for science.

Modified: 11/21/2010