Euclidean or Projective Care?

How many dimensions does a written - narrative record have?

Sketching out some ideas, I asked the question on Google and as usual an AI Overview response followed - snippet:

AI Overview

A physical written record has two primary spatial dimensions (length and breadth/width) as a flat document, or three dimensions (including thickness or depth/height) when considering its physical form or binding. [1, 2]

In archival and Records Continuum theory, a written record exists dynamically across four conceptual dimensions: [1, 2].

I put the question to the Records Management list with the above snippet and received several useful suggestions and sources. Perhaps I can share that at a future point? 

Acutely aware of not pursuing maths and category theory for its own sake, the query was driven by an attempt to look at Hodges' model in mathematical terms. Starting, rather obviously with the models structure and axes. When the model is assembled, as per many posts, the vertical axis:

INDIVIDUAL
|
GROUP

- shouts out the issue of parity and the distinction between mind and body. It does this at the individual and collective level. If we were to draw a silo, a cylinder springs to mind, and there are specific reasons for silos adopting this shape. Descartes gives us the perfect excuse, in the ongoing legacy. 

     Mathematical Visions

The question above came up from Joan L. Richards book 'Mathematical Visions' (c/o Lancaster Univ. library). Euclidean and the emergence of projective geometry is described. There is an interplay between 2D and 3D representation, that made me think about the health record and its dimensions. Not in a dataset sense (multi-dimensional), more generally and concretely(?). A patient's record on paper has physical dimensions (A4), there is a flow. An EHR has its virtual dimensions (discuss!). Abstractly the content is a time machine. At some point in a health encounter it is a literal 'history', the level of detail in accord with the context. The record might present the problem, premorbid situation, diagnosis, current state, observations and prognosis and much more.

I can revisit this, Richards provides a series of figures. We progress from two distinct circles (my silos) through to examples with a discussion of continuity and projection that sees the circles touching, then intersecting. This is a radical axis.

Richards, Joan L. (1988), Mathematical Visions: The Pursuit of Geometry in Victorian England, Boston: Academic Press, ISBN0-12-587445

Book cover: Amazon.

UN votes to adopt new world map to reflect Africa's true size | BBC News

UN tells the world: Stop making Africa look small

'By 164 votes to one, Member States on Friday endorsed a resolution promoting map projections that more accurately reflect the true size of continents – the culmination of an African-led campaign against the 16th-century Mercator projection, still the most widely used map in the world. 

The United States cast the sole vote against, dismissing the initiative as part of a “radical ideological project.” 

Six countries – Estonia, Georgia, Lithuania, Moldova, Serbia and Ukraine – abstained. 

The resolution does not ban the Mercator projection or impose a replacement. Instead, it encourages governments, schools, international organizations and technology companies to use the Equal Earth projection and other so-called equal-area maps when relative size matters, and to teach the limitations of any flat map in representing a spherical planet.'

Continued ... UN

Previously: 'cartography'

h2cm: Globalization, Accommodation theory and Relativism (Grayling, 2010)

From A.C. Grayling's Ideas that Matter, 2010, Phoenix.

Globalization: p. 235-236.

A more neutral account of globalization describes it as the process of making things known, done, available or possessed worldwide - such as Internet access, telecommunications, medical knowledge and benefits such as vaccines, transport technologies, political ideas, art and music, books and much besides.

Grayling also explains how the increased distribution associated with globalization is unequal, hence the sense of injustice that is felt resulting in protest.

The health care domains model is concerned with making things known - helping to make knowledge available on a personal, group and family level. This is no Mercator projection, not even Peter's projection but it is a global map.

Accommodation theory: p. 3-5.

Accommodation theory states that when people talk to each, they adjust their behaviour and manner of speech to take account of (to accommodate themselves to) the topic, the circumstances, and the other people engaged with them in conversation.

There are many theories to explain how we communicate and thereby model(?) ourselves, others and the world. Imagine a doctor's surgery and the morning's clinical consultations, it is easy to envisage the role that accommodation routinely plays. The one-to-one conversation (dialogue, argumentation, debate) can be extended, and viewed as the combined chatter, the whole series of multidisciplinary Q&A with the breaks (the silences when we are listening!). Accommodation theory has proved of value in multiculturalism, especially on policy concerning immigration and integration. p.5

The care domains provide an ethnoculturally neutral space (it could be argued) for the accommodations that are demanded in the 21st Century. 

Relativism: p.433.

There is a distinction to be drawn between moral or cultural relativism, on the one hand, and cognitive relativism on the other. The former concerns the difference between cultures, or between different historical phases of the same culture, with respect to religious, social, and moral values and practices, that is, with respect to what might be called the 'superstructure' of the culture's conceptual scheme. Cognitive relativism concerns the 'infrastructure', the level of basic beliefs about the world, such as that there are perception-independent, re-identifiable and individually discriminable objects or events, occupying space and time, interacting causally, and bearing properties of various kinds.

Much is said of the games that people play. Whether the care domains model provides a game board that can accommodate both the super- and infrastructural conceptual levels is open to question. In the health career model the infrastructure level concepts are light - as we find that they reside in the upper part of the model: perceived, individually discriminable (INTRApersonal) objects occupying space and time (SCIENCES) with mass, weight, inertia. ... The political domain prompts access to values and how these shape the total conceptual landscape(s), the conversations and silences that go on there ...