The methodology for building and mining.

According to Jenny Quillien, the best patterns aren't actually ‘designed’, rather they are ‘mined’ and polished. Patterns already exist out there, ready to be discovered.

Jenny Quillien offers a methodology to ‘Unravel Problems of Organized Complexity’ by untangling the variables and the smaller segments that compose them:

Progress in understanding problems of organized complexity comes from:

a) First ‘preparing for analysis,’ where the concern is still with “collection, description, classification, and observations of apparently correlated effects.”  

b) Identifying a specific variable―just as the biologist singles out, say, an enzyme, and then follows its relationships with other variables.

c) Making our observations in terms of the behavior and not just the mere presence of other specific (not general) variables.

d) Focusing on specific processes and, like Sherlock Holmes, seeking ‘unaverage’ clues that reveal larger patterns.

e) Realizing that these variables “do not exhibit one problem which if understood explains all. They can be analyzed into many such problems or segments which are also related with one another.” And, “when the segments are separated out the behaviors of a variable when in the presence of other variables can be discerned.”

The process of mining and finding patterns, of breaking them down into smaller segments, of probing their sustainability and trueness to purpose, of assembling them into sequences of aggregate patterns and of probing again, is part of a peer-to-peer learning process that will enhance systemic awareness and literacy.

Jenny Quillien offers a methodology to ‘Unravel Problems of Organized Complexity’ by untangling the variables and the smaller segments that compose them:

Progress in understanding problems of organized complexity comes from:

a) First ‘preparing for analysis,’ where the concern is still with “collection, description, classification, and observations of apparently correlated effects.”  

b) Identifying a specific variable―just as the biologist singles out, say, an enzyme, and then follows its relationships with other variables.

c) Making our observations in terms of the behavior and not just the mere presence of other specific (not general) variables.

d) Focusing on specific processes and, like Sherlock Holmes, seeking ‘unaverage’ clues that reveal larger patterns.

e) Realizing that these variables “do not exhibit one problem which if understood explains all. They can be analyzed into many such problems or segments which are also related with one another.” And, “when the segments are separated out the behaviors of a variable when in the presence of other variables can be discerned.”

> Quoting Jane Jacobs

The process of mining and finding patterns, of breaking them down into smaller segments, of probing their sustainability and trueness to purpose, of assembling them into sequences of aggregate patterns and of probing again, is part of a peer-to-peer learning process that will enhance systemic awareness and literacy.

On mined & polished:

Kurt Laitner 12:59 AM Nov 5

On the methodology:

Kurt Laitner 1:11 AM Nov 5

On Jane Jacobs:

Jessie Lydia Henshaw 2:46 PM Yesterday

This is not at all my sense of Jane Jacobs, as an expansive reductionist... not at all! Jacobs' insight was not analytical, but synthetic, recognizing that how the parts of the city thrive is by leaving "creative messes" for each other to play in and with.

She was intensely aware of how nature's organizations relied on opposite fitting parts that find how to co-operate, like man and machine, for example, as exact matched pairs as an organizational unit, fitting a given co-operating task, for fitting in with a network of others.

I think my terminology here gets that clearly stated, but not sure how it'll be read. That's in question when addressing semantics that expresses something at odds with its ultimate subject. Please help clarify this issue by pointing out better ways to say it perhaps.

Show less

Helene Finidori 4:34 PM Yesterday

I found Jenny's quoting of Jane Jacobs in one of her books (she had sent me the paper directly too). And there's a piece where she describes the city too and links the two. Quite interesting you bring this up. It's pages 90-92: http://bit.ly/1y94und

Kurt Laitner 6:53 PM Yesterday

the notion of 'receptors' figures prominently in the (sadly in progress) ceptr system from the metacurrency folks (art brock and eric harris-braun) somewhat unapproachable, but intriguing - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Line362Wm0zMOZcEZMqPYfHqNS4XIVyVsP7SS_4jE2o/edit#

Jessie Lydia Henshaw 8:41 PM Yesterday

I was not able to use the link to Jenny's writings, not owning the book it seemed. Have another source? I haven't found it easy to understand Brock either, JJ is so down to earth in my reading.

When i try out a new word or expression, I ask "what does it refer to". To me words by themselves are immaterial, like money is, and don't mean much unless they refer to something else of substance to ground the meaning of the word in.

Show less

Helene Finidori 10:49 AM Today