[p2p-research] [p2pf] Re: Defining terms for clear communication

Sat Jan 12 18:24:46 CET 2008

Hi Michel , Patrick , All ,

... hmm ... although I might not be an expert , in relation to this thread ,
I just realize its interesting to situate our communication midst
understanding of
*
... semantics ( ? ) *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics
*
... pragmatics ( ? ) *
*
"Related to semantics is the field of **
pragmatics<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics>,
which studies the practical use of signs by
agents<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent>or
communities <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community> of interpretation
within particular circumstances and contexts "
**
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics

**" ... The ability to understand another speaker's intended meaning is
called **pragmatic competence. *"
*
... Meta-Pragmatics ( ? )**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metapragmatics

" In anthropology <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_anthropology>,
describing the rules of use for metapragmatic speech (in the same way that a
grammar would describe the rules of use for 'ordinary' or semantic speech)
is important because it can aid the understanding and analysis of a
culture's linguistic ideology <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology>.* "

I guess we do not yet have a language that allows for visualizing the
specific definitions of each concept and meaning we want to express or build
on. We often get lost in our own interpretations of semantics , or in
redefining continually within a group what we might mean by a certain word ,
and according to the context.

The p2p foundation wiki might be useful in collecting and positioning
different views and definitions.

Yet I feel it does not yet facilitate building with simple complexity.

I feel a positioning of relations , post symbolic language can emerge soon.

I would be happy to work on this with anyone interested.

I imagine a dynamic positioning of concepts relational base software.

I m not fully sure about the details to technically build up such a tool for
a language of languages.

I imagine , as hypothesis , that with such a positioning of relations tool
we could see the conceptual object and its relations to all other conceptual
objects , at various levels of abstractions , directly on a screen , or in a
3d hologram navigation , while being able to add , compare , or build on
everyones languages , not only from different cultures and spoken languages
, but the different interpretation of every word according to the relations
every person might make from it ,

and based on this , it becomes easier to compare and build on our
differences ,
and create even more value , through difference ( as difference opens up new
opportunities for relations )

while also having a medium / new kind of support to visualize and build on
infinite levels of abstractions.

In the way I visualize it in head , it seems that on such a tool any concept
, process , ... can be related between each other , in some ways like a big
mind map , but a completely flexible mind map , that allows for multiple
levels of abstraction ( for example , being able to use one relation between
objects , as an object itself but at level of abstraction +1 , ... )

I ve been researching projects or ideas that might relate to such intention
,or could be used and inspire such a tool.

The list of links is availble under tags such as
http://del.icio.us/deliciousdante/ReferenceMaps
or http://del.icio.us/deliciousdante/visualization

for example ,
There are some softwares such as

http://prefuse.org/

but its not yet completely the kind of tool for a meta-cortex that I
imagine.

For every dynamic object to be able to see each other , I imagine there to
be some kind of gravity - some links in relation to quantum gravity can also
be found on
http://del.icio.us/deliciousdante/ReferenceMaps

I also like to imagine the combination of such a meta-cortex tool / dynamic
positioning or relations at various levels of abstraction ,

with a process dimensions engine software , for which details can be found
on http://oikoumene.coforum.net/processdimensions

I also guess cooperation could be possible with research departments in the
field of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_visualization

I ve already mentionned such perspective with some of you ,

and for those with which I did not share it with yet ,

If you know any related projects , feel free to let me know.

If you are interested in this topic , please lets get in touch.

I believe such kind of tool , such kind of meta language , or new form of
writing ,

has the capacity to build beyond , yet integrate , all writing systems
currently used and used throughout history  -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing_system  - including
syllabic<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabary>and
alphabetic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabet> ,
logographic<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logogram>, ... - , while also
integrating all different meanings of words according
to their contexts , throughout history ( as any kind of visualization option
, including historical and other contextual projections could be chosen )

When enough objects / concepts , ... relations at various levels of
abstraction are added , even when the sets of relations made would still be
in formation , by leaving it open for editing to everyone , and by allowing
further emergence through networking relational data bases ,

we will be able to visualize clouds , according to the perspective of
visualization chosen ,
of various meaning dimensions.

Meaning Dimensions , at the ability to create new relations collaboratively
based on their visualization , will allow a whole new path for communication
, beyond verbal language , yet also integrating verbal language , written
communication , of any language , any culture , any individual , any context
, ...

Greetings

Dante

http://oikoumene.coforum.net/DanteGabryell

On Jan 12, 2008 1:56 PM, Michel Bauwens < michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:

>   Just to summarize my practical position, without the need to
> misinterpret my thoughts (I do not advocate random strings in the wiki):
>
> - I fully support your project, as long as it is property contextualized,
> that's all really
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Jan 12, 2008 3:17 AM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 10, 2008 9:49 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Patrick,
> > >
> > > I think your aim is totally irrealistic. Terms do never stabilize,
> > they are ever moving > and used from particular perspectives which change
> > over time, your example of
> > > value is right on target for that. I did a lot of reading last year on
> > that value thing,
> > > only to conclude that it is used in a variety of ways. You can only
> > enforce it in small
> > > communities, probably with some power to back up your definitions. But
> > the P2P
> > > Foundation is a pluralist collective, with only a minimal consensus
> > that peer to peer
> > > is generally a good thing ...
> >
> > Ok.  I understand your goals for the wiki now.  I faultily assumed it
> > was to be used toward the goal of *proving* or *disproving* parts of
> > any one person's claims.  If the only purpose is to dump data that
> > single humans have conjured into existence without debate or
> > correction (I assume some of what I  write is also incorrect), then my
> > approach is completely out of place.
> >
> >
> > > What you can do is choose terms and define terms in the particular
> > context of your
> > > project, with the people who are willing to follow you on that path
> > ... and for me
> > > that means that it should be clearly indicated where that particular
> > definition
> > > comes from. Take cost, I'm using it in a very general way to refer to
> > the debates
> > > about coordination costs and transaction costs, as put forward by
> > Benkler et al
> > > and they are widely understood 'in a broad sense' in social science
> > and economist
> > > communities. As I reference the source, anyone can then verify what
> > the
> > > perspective is.
> >
> > Yes, we can view Benkler's arbitrary definition of 'cost', and we can
> > view a dozen other definitions for 'cost', but when using the word in
> > a sentence where we are trying to establish it's relation to 'price',
> > 'profit', 'wage', etc. so that we can move forward with discovering
> > the *truth* (assuming such a thing exists),  there is almost no hope
> > of conveying our meaning to readers or for them to make meaningful
> > replies because all of those terms are floating.
> >
> > What a mess.  Would it be any less effective to use random strings of
> > characters to denote those terms?  Are you interested in discovering
> > the real problems and solutions, or only in reporting what others have
> > already dreamed up?
> >
> > >
> > > In contrast, you give a definition, which in my view is terse and
> > which I do not
> > > understand, there is no reference, no contextual or perspectival
> > add-on, and the
> > > only way I could understand it, is if I have the willingness to follow
> > you on a
> > > long-term path of user ownership theory ...
> >
> > To clarify: I am not trying to "take over" any definition.  Anything I
> > have written in the wiki is only my 'vote' toward that term's
> > definition.  I assumed others would 'fight' with me about this until
> > we could come to a semi-stable agreement.  As I said before, I really
> > don't care which word is used for each definition, only that they can
> > (eventually) be used when constructing sentences to each other so we
> > don't have so many iterations and irritations.
> >
> > > the role of the wiki as I see it, is to offer a multi-perspectival
> > vision on peer to peer
> > > related subjects, not one particular view; if a particular view is
> > offered, it should be
> > > contextualized,
> >
> > Offering differing perspectives is useful at first, but will we ever
> > use that data to come to any conclusions?   Is the whole point to
> > simply record and to never act?  How will we know if any part of any
> > theory is correct or incorrect if all we do is keep all authors
> > separated by variations in terms?  That seems like a lonely and
> > unproductive road.
> >
> >
> > Anyway, I'll make the changes you suggest with the tag
> > [[Category:User_Owned]] if that is ok with you.
> >
> > (I think "User Owned" sounds better, as it compares well with the well
> > known idea of "Worker Owned" corporations.)
> >
> > >
> > > Michel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 10, 2008 10:43 PM, Lord AGNUcius <agnucius at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello fellow P2P Researchers!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > My name is Patrick Anderson.  I've been lurking here for a few
> > months, but
> > > > when I tried to post a reply to Michel yesterday, my email was not
> > > > recognized I think because of something to do with the way DNS
> > resolves my
> > > > email address to my hosting provider instead of to my registered
> > domain...
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, that's all fixed and here is my slightly edited response:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Michel,
> > > >
> > > > I agree with your concern, but the fix you propose would not help
> > > > our community come to any sort of "agreement" on the definition of
> > the
> > > > terms we need to communicate clearly with each other.  Any such
> > > > "agreement" would probably need to be held in a sort of semi-stable
> > > > 'tension' after many suggestions, battles, and rewrites, but at
> > least we
> > > > would know what terms to choose when writing new sentences to
> > minimize
> > > > confusion.
> > > >
> > > > I consider term definition the primary reason for faulty
> > communication and
> > > > misunderstanding that often leads to unnecessary conflict and lack
> > of
> > > > resolution.
> > > >
> > > > For instance, what does the word 'Value' mean?  To some people,
> > 'Value'
> > > > means the ability withhold the physical sources of production from
> > user
> > > > control for the sole purpose of keeping price above cost.
> >  Governments use
> > > > this definition and the scarcity logic based on it to do terrible
> > things
> > > > in the name of progress including using OUR tax dollars to pay
> > farmers to
> > > > NOT grow foods such as wheat so supply is artificially restrained
> > and
> > > > profit is perpetuated.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > After writing that last paragraph I was reading the Oekonux list and
> >
> > > > noticed a great example of this:
> > > >
> > > > Dmytri Kleiner writes at http://www.oekonux.org/list-en/archive/msg04129.html
> >
> > > > >> Here Stefan appears to have lost his command of the distinction
> > > > >> between "value" (use-value) and "price" (exchange-value). Does
> > > > >> he mean that workers can capture the "use-value" of their
> > > > >> labour-power ("work-force")? This would mean his claim was
> > > > >> self-contradictory as with equal access to productive assets
> > > > >> this by definition would be the final product of their
> > > > >> labour ("value of their work")?
> > > >
> > > > Stefan Meretz responds with
> > > > http://www.oekonux.org/list-en/archive/msg04145.html
> > > > >>> Due to "translations" being wrong, you are mislead. Value means
> > value,
> > > > >>> and not use-value. Price means price and not exchange-value.
> > > >
> > > > How can we ever expect to help each other resolve concerns when we
> > are not
> > > > even speaking the same language?  We each live in our own little
> > world
> > > > where every word and phrase means slightly different things to each
> > of us
> > > > depending upon our background and the assumptions we make.
> > > >
> > > > I don't really care which definition is chosen for each term, only
> > > > that we can finally use them in regular discourse and that they are
> > > > 'stable' enough to allow the creation of claims and proofs that have
> >
> > > > deterministic meaning.
> > > >
> > > > Once these definitions stabilize, the meaning of a sentence such as:
> > > > "Profit can be calculated as the difference between the Price a
> > consumer
> > > > pays, and all the Costs (including Wages) that the Owners already
> > paid for
> > > > that round of Production." will either make sense to the reader, or
> > that
> > > > reader can click on any of those terms to find what the community
> > has
> > > > already decided about how that word or phrase is to be interpreted.
> >  The
> > > > clickability of those words is not yet automated, but could be
> > through a
> > > > plugin that implements the ideas at
> > http://CommunityWiki.org/en/PlainLink
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > I will add the tags you suggest if you reject this proposal, but
> > otherwise
> > > > would like to see pages such as the following adjusted according to
> > what
> > > > is most "correct" in the collective minds of the P2P Foundation
> > members.
> > > >
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Rent
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Cost
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Price
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Profit
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Wage
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Product
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Physical_Source
> > > > http://P2PFoundation.net/Value
> > > >
> > > > ... There are others I've forgotten for now...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your peer,
> > > > Patrick
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Patrick,
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for adding your items to the wiki, which I think is a good
> > thing
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > however, I'm concerned by the lack of context for readers, as your
> > prose
> > > > > is
> > > > > very terse, and self-referential, referring to a context most
> > people will
> > > > > be
> > > > > unfamiliar with.
> > > > >
> > > > > I therefore propose to things:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) that you would have your own area under Projects (see bottom of
> > right
> > > > > column); that you would tag your items so they also appear
> > automatically
> > > > > in
> > > > > that category, and that you clearly indicate in your entries, some
> > > > > indication of the context, for example: "as used in [[User
> > Ownership]]
> > > > > theory .. Readers have to know why there is no general description
> > of the
> > > > > term, but a definition within a specific context .
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think? If you agree, what should you/we use as a
> > specialized
> > > > > tag? Perhaps: [[Category:Usertheory]] ??
> > > > >
> > > > > Michel
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > p2presearch mailing list
> > > > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > > >
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
> > alternatives.
> > >
> > > Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
> > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
> >
> > >
> > > Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview
> > at
> > http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
> > > BEST VIDEO ON P2P: http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
> >
> > >
> > > KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at
> > http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
> > >
> > > The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> > http://www.shiftn.com/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
> alternatives.
>
> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>
> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
> BEST VIDEO ON P2P: http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>
>
> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>  __._,_.___  Messages in this topic
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/message/270;_ylc=X3oDMTMzZzg5bjRiBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRtc2dJZAMyNzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3BHRwY0lkAzI3MA-->(
> 2)  Reply (via web post)
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJwYmMycHBuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRtc2dJZAMyNzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3?act=reply&messageNum=272>| Start
> a new topic
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMjRjZm9jBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEyMDAxMzg5OTc->
>  Messages
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJma2tvY2U4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNtc2dzBHN0aW1lAzEyMDAxMzg5OTc->|
> Files<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNHVtcnN0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3>| Photos
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/photos;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaWUzb3FtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNwaG90BHN0aW1lAzEyMDAxMzg5OTc->|
> Links<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/links;_ylc=X3oDMTJna2JmNnRxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNsaW5rcwRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3>| Database
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/database;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdWVmYWZsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNkYgRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3>|
> Polls<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/polls;_ylc=X3oDMTJnY3JmbGVpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNwb2xscwRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3>| Members
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcTBlbW8yBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEyMDAxMzg5OTc->| Calendar
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/calendar;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZHYyZGIwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNjYWwEc3RpbWUDMTIwMDEzODk5Nw-->
>  MARKETPLACE
>  ------------------------------
> Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS,
> BS, MS degree<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12m62v802/M=571476.12066680.12490312.11509771/D=groups/S=1705060682:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1200146197/A=5086951/R=0/SIG=12k8pu1n3/*http://college-finder.net/index.cfm?key=yahoo_colfngrouptxt_12066680&c=CA152932587>-
> College-Finder.net.
>   [image: Yahoo! Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcmNnZTg5BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTIwMDEzODk5Nw-->
> Change settings via the Web
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJndXNpMWNtBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNzdG5ncwRzdGltZQMxMjAwMTM4OTk3>(Yahoo! ID required)
> Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest<p2pf-digest at yahoogroups.com?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest>| Switch
> format to Traditional<p2pf-traditional at yahoogroups.com?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>
>  Visit Your Group
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNDdkcGFoBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNocGYEc3RpbWUDMTIwMDEzODk5Nw-->| Yahoo!
> Groups Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> | Unsubscribe
> <p2pf-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=>
>   Visit Your Group
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/p2pf;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZWVrMDZsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE1MTkzNDUxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEyMDAxMzg5OTc->
>  Parenting Zone
>
> Your home for<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12jm688iv/M=493064.12016283.12445687.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1200146197/A=5045822/R=0/SIG=11gsqr691/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/parenting/>
>
> parenting information
>
> on Yahoo! Groups.
>  Autos Group
>
> on Yahoo! Groups<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12j55tnhn/M=493064.12117566.12537396.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1200146197/A=5170413/R=0/SIG=11b4jsa2l/*http://new.groups.yahoo.com/craftsmanauto>
>
> Discuss ways to
>
> fix your car.
>  Search Ads
>
> Get new customers.<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12j0l1tdt/M=493064.12016308.12445700.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1200146197/A=3848641/R=0/SIG=1312g85fq/*http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/srchv2.php?o=US2003&cmp=Yahoo&ctv=Groups2&s=Y&s2=&s3=&b=50>
>
> List your web site
>
> in Yahoo! Search.
>   .
>
> __,_._,___
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080112/35775713/attachment-0001.html 