Session 6 - Innovative socio-technological evolutions: A Conceptual ecological dynamic between open-ended and closed-ended transformation?
Location
University of Nevada Las Vegas, Stan Fulton Building
Start Date
1-6-2007 4:10 PM
End Date
1-6-2007 4:20 PM
Description
”It isn’t that they can’t find solutions, it is that they don’t see the problem” Gilbert K.Chesterton (1874-1936) Related to “cognitive engineering” and equivalent to LCA (Life Cycle Analysis), a dynamic “adaptive cycle” analysis is projected for “living systems”. Cultural and technological “paradigm shifts” could be traced from (1) orientation and growth to (2) disorientation and crisis leading to breakdowns without (3) reorientation and (4) renewal. Established techniques, once they become closed-ended lose sight of tranformative open-ended and evolutionary requirements. The inablility to generate renewal relates to terminal disorientation. Methods no longer able to cope with sustainable demands have been identified as ”progress traps”, “ingenuity gaps,” and are potentially related to cognitive “mental traps.” A generic analytical tool tracing transformational and transactional interactions could preventively mitigate risks. The Two Cultures (C.P. Snow, 1959) identify the (A) Humanities and the (B) Sciences in “mutual incomprehension” and opposition. Deficiencies in (AB) interactions diminish means that can guard against devolutionary and catastrophic disorders. Analogously, cultural certainties and uncertainties as a paradox in variance could be analyzed in terms of imbalance and optimal equilibrium, possibly with Dynamic Boolean Logic. ”Without paradox, no progress” Niels Bohr (1885-1962).
Keywords
Adaptability (Psychology); Adaptive cycle analysis; Establishment traps; Evolving systems; Organizational change; Technological innovations; Technology changes
Disciplines
Science and Technology Studies | Technology and Innovation
Language
English
Permissions
Use Find in Your Library, contact the author, or use interlibrary loan to garner a copy of the article. Publisher copyright policy allows author to archive post-print (author’s final manuscript). When post-print is available or publisher policy changes, the article will be deposited
COinS
Session 6 - Innovative socio-technological evolutions: A Conceptual ecological dynamic between open-ended and closed-ended transformation?
University of Nevada Las Vegas, Stan Fulton Building
”It isn’t that they can’t find solutions, it is that they don’t see the problem” Gilbert K.Chesterton (1874-1936) Related to “cognitive engineering” and equivalent to LCA (Life Cycle Analysis), a dynamic “adaptive cycle” analysis is projected for “living systems”. Cultural and technological “paradigm shifts” could be traced from (1) orientation and growth to (2) disorientation and crisis leading to breakdowns without (3) reorientation and (4) renewal. Established techniques, once they become closed-ended lose sight of tranformative open-ended and evolutionary requirements. The inablility to generate renewal relates to terminal disorientation. Methods no longer able to cope with sustainable demands have been identified as ”progress traps”, “ingenuity gaps,” and are potentially related to cognitive “mental traps.” A generic analytical tool tracing transformational and transactional interactions could preventively mitigate risks. The Two Cultures (C.P. Snow, 1959) identify the (A) Humanities and the (B) Sciences in “mutual incomprehension” and opposition. Deficiencies in (AB) interactions diminish means that can guard against devolutionary and catastrophic disorders. Analogously, cultural certainties and uncertainties as a paradox in variance could be analyzed in terms of imbalance and optimal equilibrium, possibly with Dynamic Boolean Logic. ”Without paradox, no progress” Niels Bohr (1885-1962).