Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Truth engines

The banner reflects this concept now. That truth engineering is going to show its necessity is a given and a task. That engineering implies an 'engine' will be a central theme. The idea is to get beyond the anecdotal to an operational stance that has predictive power. That's a big undertaking, one might counter. Yes, but it's essential.

That finance is in a shambles will allow reasonable foundational discussions that can be both concrete and theoretic (say, untangling the opaque web hedge fund).

As mentioned, some truth engines are given via the natural world in which we live, and others are given via our magnificent selves (see people as a type, Remarks) as exhibited by our current evolutionary state. Within that framework, we have had enough experience over time to be fairly effective in surviving and progressing, though that we know that success is not a given. No, many things are beyond our direct control (and knowledge). And, one can argue about luck and fortune, as we have seen with the interminable discussions over the eons.

So, what is new? Well, mathematics, for one, as it is taught on a much larger scale now than ever. But, too, the computer (the term used generally to cover all aspects, see ACM, IEEE, and much more) has changed the scene. As Chaitin says, "Now everything has gone topsy-turvy. It's gone topsy-turvy, not because of any philosophical argument, not because of Gödel's results or Turing's results or my own incompleteness results. It's gone topsy-turvy for a very simple reason---the computer! ".

Some have exploited the situation, as we see with finance. But, plenty of other examples abound.
New disciplines have evolved, such as risk management.

Each generation deals with newer types and configurations of truth engines. However, there are threads that have been there, and growing, throughout time, and history, that we can use. In fact, we do not even have to go to big 'T' truth issues to consider these.

Are we talking more than situational logic here? Well, yes and no. Yes in the sense that multi-logics are required; no, in that we all know that things are not new under the sun and in that iterative improvements through time and generations has been our forte (the meme and more).

That last aside was biologically motivated. That computationally-derived truth engines will (need to) have biological analogs, and spawn metaphors, will become more apparent through time.

This post is introductory; expect that coming posts will continue to expand upon this theme.


03/23/2012 -- Renewal of the idea (and related energies) via Cooper and CiE.

11/21/2010 -- Three years ago, it was said: Computational foci raise miraculous need. Still applies.

06/18/2009 -- We are collecting types of truth engines. People are a type.

05/27/2009 -- That we have topsy-turvy needs to be addressed more fully in both an epistemologic and an operational sense.

05/22/2009 -- Let's consider the legal types.

05/06/2009 -- Given the multi-disciplinary flavor of this study, a list of related work is always apropos. Risk management was mentioned. We can add handling uncertainty smartly. 'spooky science' (see WSJ weekly reflection) will play a role, too.

Modified: 03/23/2013

No comments: