That simple story was the beginning. The magnitude of what that beginning has become is what we celebrate today. The exact thing we celebrate today is not the birth event of the past, except to the extent that it did happen (conceptually or in fact the reality of the bible for believers), but the result that is woven throughout our American, Christian oriented social structure today.
Christmas is our Holy Day. It does not exist or is rejected by the other major religious traditions. To put Christmas in perspective requires a digression to a review of the the Abrahamic religious traditions and beliefs to establish the frame of thought for building this idea: All seek to reduce Complexity to Simplicity. A concept of Unity from which all derives. Here is what is important and what this entry on this Christmas day intends to present: All of this religious tradition is based on conceptual and actual descendancy. The word "Conceptual" as used here being an elusive term to the extent that the object of the conceptual word or expression may or may not have "Really" existed in temporal time and space and anything existing beyond temporal time and space as we know it may or may not "Really" exist. Confusing? Yes, of course! That is the point: Reducing complexity to simplicity. The perception of complexity (or ultimate simplicity of Unity) of everything beyond temporal time and space is an optional conceptual matter that may or may not be believed. Believe in it or not, the implementation of the belief or non-belief in the spiritual existence of a Source of descendancy is not contradictory to the temporal real world implementation of our human existence and the ideal natural social structure of relationships among people and our social institutions.
Different interpretations of the Source in the spiritual world and implementation of those beliefs in the real world are merely different user views of the same "Thing". Identifying the "Thing" as a child of the spiritual "Thing" or the child as the conceptual and real " "Thing" we call a "Human" can make no difference. A "Human Being" any specific real human child, is an instance of an Entity of Human Beings even if there is no higher non-human being Entity which anyone may believe that the child descended.
Maybe that preceding thought is a shared universal joy of birth. We are all children born of parents. Conceived from the instant of independent yet still dependent existence as baby child with ability to know only natural behaviors. Learning natural behaviors until born and then beginning to know conceptual behaviors. Beginning to know conceptual behaviours from the moment of birth. Natural and Conceptual existence that may or may not be attributed to but in any case would not conflict with any beliefs in non-natural real world spiritual origins.
Abrahamic Religion: (Wikipedia Link)
It has been suggested that the phrase, "Abrahamic religion", may simply mean that all these religions come from one spiritual source.[2] Christians refer to Abraham as a "father in faith".[Rom. 4] There is an Islamic religious term, Millat Ibrahim (faith of Ibrahim),[3][4] indicating that Islam sees itself as having practices tied to the traditions of Abraham.[10] Jewish tradition claims descendance from Abraham, and adherents follow his practices and ideals as the first of the three spiritual "fathers", Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
All the major Abrahamic religions claim a direct lineage to Abraham.
The largest Abrahamic religions are, in chronological order of founding, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Baha'i Faith.
However, the term "Abrahamic faiths", while helpful, is also misleading.[14] It conveys an unspecified historical and theological commonality that is problematic on closer examination. While there is commonality among the religions, in large measure their shared ancestry is peripheral to their respective foundational beliefs and thus conceals crucial differences. For example, the common Christian beliefs of Incarnation, Trinity, and Jesus' Resurrection are not accepted by Judaism or Islam (see for example Islamic view of Jesus' death). There are key beliefs in both Islam and Judaism that are not shared by most of Christianity (such as strict monotheism and adherence to the Law), and key beliefs of Islam and Christianity not shared by Judaism (such as the prophetic and Messianic position of Jesus, respectively), and so on.[15]
I find that there is a real world paradigm of conscious birth and beginning to learn that is analogous to child birth that has been developing since the birth of consciousness, self awareness, that made us distinctly human. That paradigm is the application of our human mind to create a conceptual structure in harmony with our human nature. The best structure that we could come up with at any point in our prior history. Always progressing although sometimes regressing as a failure to progress.
The best conceptual and physical structures that we are able to create today are the product of, the implementation of, our best ability so far to organize and apply our thoughts based on simplicity to their implementation in complexity. The ability to produce the complexity of real and conceptual structures as a product of a few great minds employing the minds and physical resources of many has gone beyond the ability of the minds of the many to reduce the complexity we face in this world today to the simplicity we seek as an explanation.
Old explanations of spiritual origin simplicity were good enough. They served us well. They can continue to serve us well for those that wish to continue to believe in them but we must have a real world simplicity of non conflicting real world perception of conscious thought that we all accept as as a true simple reality that organizes our conceptual structures and the real world around us that we have created form those thoughts: The real world of our thoughts as expressed by our social structures as well as the physical things those thoughts and social structures have produced.
A simple single source concept that is the product of our best thinking to reduces our temporal complexity to simplicity is expressed by Object Oriented thinking. It is that school of thought upon which to build our future real and conceptual structures. Object Oriented thinking is in harmony with the natural temporal world of our existence as well as in harmony with any spiritual world in which any individual or society may wish to believe.
While Object Orientation is a programming methodology at the computer application level it is also a methodology for conceptualizing high level abstract thought. The state of the art is the result of pioneers in this area. Pioneers that, unlike those that won us the west, are still living today and continuing to lead us in showing the way. Things are happening faster. Those that gave birth to the big concepts that are our progress today and are still at the forefront of thought development are the ones to look to for guidance for the methodologies to solves the complexities of today's problems to simplicity in comprehending and seeing what the nature of the problems and the solutions are.
This is what I find to be our best hope. The birth of a new high level abstract conceptual child that will lead us in information and knowledge technology as science has lead us industrially in the past.
SEMAT
SEMAT (Software Engineering Method and Theory) is an initiative to reshape software engineering such that software engineering qualifies as a rigorous discipline. The initiative was launched in December 2009 by Ivar Jacobson, Bertrand Meyer, and Richard Soley.[1]
The sponsors and supporters of the SEMAT initiative have agreed and signed the following Call for Action [2]:
Software engineering is gravely hampered today by immature practices. Specific problems include:
- The prevalence of fads more typical of fashion industry than of an engineering discipline
- The lack of a sound, widely accepted theoretical basis
- The huge number of methods and method variants, with differences little understood and artificially magnified
- The lack of credible experimental evaluation and validation
- The split between industry practice and academic research
- Include a kernel of widely-agreed elements, extensible for specific uses
- Address both technology and people issues
- Are supported by industry, academia, researchers and users
- Support extension in the face of changing requirements and technology
SEMAT is the science that precedes the engineering application of information to create knowledge. We are proceeding in that direction in many areas. SEMAT is what organizes the progress at a high level with proscriptive specifications Kernel as described here: "Another Step Forward For SEMAT"
A conceptual child is born to guide us. For believers that choose to find the origin Source of Guidance in the spiritual world: God gifting us as he always has with a child to lead us in His way. For non-believers in God or that we are all the collective spirit of God: A child of Our minds to lead us in Our way.
For the believers: The Child's Father was a Creator. The Child's father was a carpenter, a human builder that creates structures in the real world.
My tribute to the one I love who lead me in my doing and thinking. My inspiration for who I am and where I am at today and where I am to go on this adventure.
The inspiration of SEMAT:
The book: The Essence of Software Engineering: Applying the SEMAT Kernel
The following the end of my comment in this paragraph is an excerpt from the end of the book. The book is the center. To the right is the application of the kernel to do things in the software computing world. What is most fascinating to me is to left circle, outside the book. In the direction to a higher level abstraction of the kernel to universal application to our conceptual structure view of the world and our relationship to it.
Appendix B. What Does This Book Cover with Respect to the Kernel?
In this book we introduced a number of concepts in the kernel, and how you can use them in your software endeavor. However, as we did so we inevitably also added our experiences and adaptations. We would also like to say that this book does not describe the entire kernel, but an important part of it, namely: alphas, their states, checklists, and the ability to extend the kernel. So, as a reader you might like to know what parts of the kernel are left out of this book, and what are the things we add on top of the kernel in this book.
Figure B-1 Scope of this book
No comments:
Post a Comment