Just starting out to study synthetic biology, this was quite helpful as an introduction to the term "abstraction hierarchy" as I googled. Thank you! :)
I am attempting to cross-post this video to the Wikimedia Commons, but it was deleted for Copyright infringement. Is this video intended to be licensed as Creative Commons - Attribution? If there are any difficulties related to the media contained within this video, would it be permissible to extract the audio with or without some of the video segments as Creative Commons - Attribution?
Nice video but it needs to put more emphasis on the nature of abstraction. It is a little far fetched to say that elements cannot be broken any further, even in particle physics. Rather, elements are abstractions. They are the atoms of a certain epistemological model and are indivisible only within the contingencies of such a model. In that sense, people can be seen as the elements of social models even though they can be further broken down into organs and cells. Conversely, hierarchies (epistemological ones) are also abstract creations, and just like you can nest for example chemistry within physics and physics within mathematics, you can also see them as overlapping disciplines - a non hierarchical abstract representation that is just as valid as the hierarchical one. You put it well when you specified that social hierarchies for a single set of persons can be of different types, without the resulting epistemological hierarchies being mutually exclusive.
Santiago Diazgranados Yes I think you are correct there are many different ways to represent the world, this video was trying to present one method of reasoning or model(hierarchical abstraction) used within systems theory, that's not to say the world is this way, we are just trying to outline one modelling technique. For sure atoms and people can be broken down into smaller parts, but that is too much complexity to deal with if we are trying to analyze a society or macroscopic object and thus we "black box it" or encapsulate it and call it an element simply to reduce the complexity within the model to a manageable level
from the begining he said abstraction is a tool toi remove the details on a system and focus only on its fundametal parts. thats enough information for to know what the word is about.
ironic how I applied abtraction when defining the word abstraction. You did the opposite. Meaning that, you failed to comprehend the definition of abstraction because you got everwhelmed by the details.
@@crnavas7336 No, because abstraction is a means to an end, not an end in itself. A more pragmatic stance is to navigate the spectrum of abstraction as the situation sees fit, from low to high, and back if necessary.
Im writing a book about a complex and multidisciplinary phenomena: CCTV as a part of Big Data and data driven decision system. Im tired of reading about physic, light, electricity, electronic, computers, databases, computers network, etc. And not being able to catch all logic and relationships behind and between all topics. I hope you can point me some books that can help me to ellaborate a correct method to interconnect all concepts in a coherent way to present to my readers. Sorry for my english. I can read english very well but not write it properly. Thanks in advance.
I am not sure I know of any books that might help you, your subject is quite specific. But I guess you should be looking at the subject of advanced analytics, that is where I might start if was trying to find a way to bring those topics together.
First start with light. Light powers the life on this plannet by giving power to .... plants. Plants feed bugs and animals, animals feed on each others. They grow and evolve .... Human is the only species that is capable of retaining knowleges and pass them on successive generations... that enable us not only to learn faster but able to improve later generations capacity to obtain knowledges about the world. Out of curiosities. Thus begins the inception of math, physics, biology, physiology, and all other fields of science. After that is all the tech stuff.
hmm that sound interesting. But I would say that instead of a subject, it has to be a mindset. I think that viewing thing from the same lens is what create that logic that connect all that information.
For example, believing in god can easily make you connect that math was created by him. If you think why he did it, then the answers gets a little more complicated but it is findable. ;) . If you believe that humans are on earth only to survive and maybe try to improve and prolong survival but nothing beyond that, then you can again apply the mindset and understand that in this world everything has a logical process. A cause and an effect. And maybe that is what is what unifies everything in our universe .... the key word here is maybe lol since with this mindsets everything is a maybe .
Just starting out to study synthetic biology, this was quite helpful as an introduction to the term "abstraction hierarchy" as I googled. Thank you! :)
Might it be that debate "Keynes vs Hayek" is also about the "Bottom-Up vs Top-Down causality" ? ;-)
I am attempting to cross-post this video to the Wikimedia Commons, but
it was deleted for Copyright infringement. Is this video intended to be
licensed as Creative Commons - Attribution?
If there are any
difficulties related to the media contained within this video, would it
be permissible to extract the audio with or without some of the video
segments as Creative Commons - Attribution?
Nice video but it needs to put more emphasis on the nature of abstraction. It is a little far fetched to say that elements cannot be broken any further, even in particle physics. Rather, elements are abstractions. They are the atoms of a certain epistemological model and are indivisible only within the contingencies of such a model. In that sense, people can be seen as the elements of social models even though they can be further broken down into organs and cells. Conversely, hierarchies (epistemological ones) are also abstract creations, and just like you can nest for example chemistry within physics and physics within mathematics, you can also see them as overlapping disciplines - a non hierarchical abstract representation that is just as valid as the hierarchical one. You put it well when you specified that social hierarchies for a single set of persons can be of different types, without the resulting epistemological hierarchies being mutually exclusive.
Santiago Diazgranados Yes I think you are correct there are many different ways to represent the world, this video was trying to present one method of reasoning or model(hierarchical abstraction) used within systems theory, that's not to say the world is this way, we are just trying to outline one modelling technique. For sure atoms and people can be broken down into smaller parts, but that is too much complexity to deal with if we are trying to analyze a society or macroscopic object and thus we "black box it" or encapsulate it and call it an element simply to reduce the complexity within the model to a manageable level
why would he say all of that for?
from the begining he said abstraction is a tool toi remove the details on a system and focus only on its fundametal parts. thats enough information for to know what the word is about.
ironic how I applied abtraction when defining the word abstraction. You did the opposite. Meaning that, you failed to comprehend the definition of abstraction because you got everwhelmed by the details.
@@crnavas7336 No, because abstraction is a means to an end, not an end in itself. A more pragmatic stance is to navigate the spectrum of abstraction as the situation sees fit, from low to high, and back if necessary.
Systems innovation presents inside looking out POV. For outside looking in POV see abstractionphysics.net
"brakes" not "breaks"
Im writing a book about a complex and multidisciplinary phenomena: CCTV as a part of Big Data and data driven decision system. Im tired of reading about physic, light, electricity, electronic, computers, databases, computers network, etc. And not being able to catch all logic and relationships behind and between all topics. I hope you can point me some books that can help me to ellaborate a correct method to interconnect all concepts in a coherent way to present to my readers. Sorry for my english. I can read english very well but not write it properly. Thanks in advance.
I am not sure I know of any books that might help you, your subject is quite specific. But I guess you should be looking at the subject of advanced analytics, that is where I might start if was trying to find a way to bring those topics together.
First start with light. Light powers the life on this plannet by giving power to .... plants. Plants feed bugs and animals, animals feed on each others. They grow and evolve .... Human is the only species that is capable of retaining knowleges and pass them on successive generations... that enable us not only to learn faster but able to improve later generations capacity to obtain knowledges about the world. Out of curiosities. Thus begins the inception of math, physics, biology, physiology, and all other fields of science. After that is all the tech stuff.
hmm that sound interesting. But I would say that instead of a subject, it has to be a mindset. I think that viewing thing from the same lens is what create that logic that connect all that information.
For example, believing in god can easily make you connect that math was created by him. If you think why he did it, then the answers gets a little more complicated but it is findable. ;) .
If you believe that humans are on earth only to survive and maybe try to improve and prolong survival but nothing beyond that, then you can again apply the mindset and understand that in this world everything has a logical process. A cause and an effect. And maybe that is what is what unifies everything in our universe .... the key word here is maybe lol since with this mindsets everything is a maybe .
which for your book could give the idea that maybe decision making systems need something that can look exactly like a mindset.
Should the government govern the people, or should the people govern the government? 🤔
Nature's hierarchy is flat. Its levels within levels yet, it feels flat....