"There are no tools stored in this van overnight"

. . . but there is a tool
with great potential
available here 24/7/365 . . .


INDIVIDUAL
|

 INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 

|

GROUP

Identity morphism

Images: 

 

https://krossovochkin.com/posts/2020_04_26_category_theory/

 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0044/4701/0919/products/no-tools-stored-in-this-vehicle-overnight-sign-646188.png?v=1680276776

"Isomorphism of structures": intra- interDomain & model as theory?

"Another illuminating example of the advantages of a posthuman scientific position is the One Health Initiative. The movement is inspired by Rudolf Virchow (1821-1902), who coined the term zoonosis, arguing that there should be no dividing lines between animal and human medicine. This position has been gathering momentum in the last fifteen years. The One Health Initiative is a rather daring interdisciplinary alliance that unites physicians, osteopaths, veterinarians, dentists, nurses, and other scientific-health and environmentally related disciplines, on the basis of a simple hypothesis, which is the isomorphism of structures between humans and animals in immunology, bacteriology, and vaccine developments. This means that humans are both exposed and vulnerable to new diseases, like bird flu and other epidemics, which they share with animal species." p.16.

 
Rosi Braidotti. (2015). Yes, There Is No Crisis. Working Towards the Posthumanities. DiGeSt. Journal of Diversity and Gender Studies, 2(1–2), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.11116/jdivegendstud.2.1-2.0009

<>

I have felt for many years that there is an implicit 'theory' in Hodges' model.

"Lastly, model is defined by May Brodbeck as "an isomorphic representation of objects that leads to an unmistakable identification of the expression of the object with the physical object." p.235.

"Though, Models like theories, are systems of generalizations based on empirical findings yet there are differences between them. A theory basically involves a set of statements, called either laws or propositions which are related to each other and which express relationships between variables under varying states of the system. It has to be kept in mind that although some tentative or untested theories are called models, a model and a theory are only roughly identical, because a model has a more static connotation. Unlike concepts, models are not arbitrary, and can be confirmed or disconfirmed. They differ in the degree of isomorphism they have with the modelled phenomena. In social science, a model is not a concrete of "real" structure. For that would be complete and idiosyncratic, from which it would be difficult to develop generalizations. An important distincton between theory and model is that while the model has primarily predictive power, a theory has both predictive and explanatory power. However, this is not true in all cases. Apart from making predictions, models can also direct us towards new materials and ground which are not yet covered thereby helping us to discover more relationships, thus serving few heuristic functions." p.237.

PATNAIK, L. K. (1989). MODEL BUILDING IN POLITICAL SCIENCE. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 234–250. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41855908

<>

I will add other useful references from here:

"Furthermore, in philosophy of science, a pragmatic view on modelling has emerged over the last decade, in which the relation between a model and its target, traditionally expressed as representation in the form of formal, structuralist or syntactic morphism (such as isomorphism), is being replaced by emphasizing a pragmatic relationship, often simply described as a situation where somebody creates a model of something with some purpose (Gelfert 2016, 113)." pp.344-45.

Ciula, A., Eide, Ø., Marras, C., & Sahle, P. (2018). Models and Modelling between Digital and Humanities. Remarks from a Multidisciplinary Perspective. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 43(4), 343–361. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26544261

Plus for completeness:
Gelfert, Axel. 2016. How to do science with models: a philosophical primer. Cham: Springer. 

<>

In the conclusion: "Despite the growing body of research pertaining to a nascent theory of emergence, its central themes are based on a limited theory–model–phenomena conception that does not adequately support those conceptual abstractions. Take, for instance, the direct transfer of microscopic concepts to macroscopic levels of analysis. Strengthening the conceptual link beyond metaphorical device is essential to a robust process of theory building and holds numerous applications, such as underpinning further social science research and theory-building pursuits. Without an effective isomorphism of theory and structures to real-world behaviour, it is an arguable conclusion that a theory of emergence for human organisation does not currently exist. Such is the importance of ontological adequacy and the interchange between conceptual models. It facilitates the practice of interdisciplinary science that characterises much of complexity research." p.319.

Yezdani, O., Sanzogni, L., & Poropat, A. (2015). Theory of emergence: introducing a model-centred approach to applied social science research. Prometheus, 33(3), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2016.1144669

My emphasis.

Identity: Self, person, client, patient ... player

INDIVIDUAL
|

 INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 

|

GROUP

Identity morphism

My source: Twitter - X

https://x.com/Ravens/status/1751712286769660409?s=20

Plus:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/lamar-jackson-makes-unreal-catch-of-his-own-pass-in-chiefs-ravens-afc-title-game-leaving-tony-romo-amazed/
 

Image:

https://krossovochkin.com/posts/2020_04_26_category_theory/

Laws of Form - Society, Conference, and Journal (to follow)

Finding out last minute at the end of last week, I attended the Laws of Form Conference at the Old Library, Liverpool University, 19 Abercromby Square L69 7ZN, UK. It was 17 minutes away by rail, so I made the short walk from Lime Street Station, as pre-existing commitments allowed.

The Society, devoted to the ideas and work of George Spencer-Brown is quite new 2023. I was greeted with a welcome that actively encourages the widest range of ideas as relates to LoF, the AGM also revealed future plans.

Laws of Form Books: Source lof50.com 

I've been on the LoF mail list for many years and every so often I've replied to themes that also touch thinking on Hodges' model. Now trying to look at Hodges' model more formally, learning of the conference I had to attend.

At the close today the vote of thanks expressed for the support of University of Liverpool and West DenHaag was shared here.

After the introduction, the first session by Andrew Crompton, of The Alternative Natural Philosophy Association, How to Make a Horse Vanish included insights into the scope of George Spencer-Brown's thought, combining philosophy, design, and architecture with great visuals. All the sessions were interesting, helpful and stimulating, including several that were technical detailing applications of Laws of Form:

".. Spencer-Brown has pointed out that he discovered an arithmetic that underlies Boolean algebra. This arithmetic is the Spencer-Brown Calculus of Indications generated by the mark <> (here written in typographical form) subject to the relations of calling, <><>=<>, and crossing, <<>> = , where, in crossing, the two marks are erased in the plane of writing. .." 
KEYNOTE Louis H Kauffman, Arithmetic in 'Laws of Form' - also Weds 7th Aug. 

Even though I could not understand the approach, listening to purposes, application and and the terminology is useful. 

I was online Thursday, and only followed the first two sessions. I have been exasperated with the various -isms, a response possibly shared with Jonathan Mize, Mind, Your Business: Reimagining business, art and science:

"The world is aching for a fresh approach to how we interact with one another. A popular prescription for our ailment is some type of new “ism,” some meticulously engineered set of dictums that propose to “fix society” once and for all. In this paper, I offer no “isms,” no grand new paradigms and no set of rules that humanity “must follow,” lest they slip into oblivion. What I offer is something very simple—a re-seeing of our approach to our everyday lives, a lifting of the vision from the “ills” and the “evils” of the world to the potential for our collective creation and experience. ..." Thurs 8th Aug.

Secondly, Diego Lucio Rapoport Campodonico, presented The Geometry and Topology of the Primal Distinction: Phenomenology and cosmo-sociomorphisms. If the public's understanding of science can be represented as a morphism, then it was extended here so I will explore.

There was a slide in the session of Florian Grote, Playing the Game of Counting to Two: On the question of requisite re-entries in communication including artificial intelligence (Friday 9th August), that I could immediately relate to Hodges' model:

"In the poem which provided the title for the book Only Two Can Play This Game, James Keys (1971) aka George Spencer-Brown provides the reader with a thorough reflection on the unlikely inevitability of a communicative – a social – world."

I can't cover all the examples of interest, but over the years systems, systems theory invariably crop up. Through the UKSS and Open University I have come across people with ties to the Schumacher Inst.. This thread continued 10th Aug, with Laws of Context with Philip Franses.

Hans Rudolf Straub's The Form and the Bit as Basic Building Blocks of Information: A comparison stood out as a source of reading conjoining LoF and informatics.

Marcus J. Carney's talk (also Sat 10th) Letting Go. The Form of Mourning reminded me of what does a single discipline mean when it uses the term 'applied'? Nursing a cold I didn't want to use the mic, but I think Marcus's work could support theory given the attention on trauma-informed care and therapy at present. There were obvious immediate connections in the abstract, borne out (well delivered!) in his presentation.

"Threnos in antiquity was understood as the activity of mourning. S. Freud dichotomised mourning with melancholia, entangling both in libido. A. and M. Mitscherlich took this up in the 1960s for the German people post Holocaust as their “inability to mourn”. J. Ruesen tried “Trauer” in this context again in the 1990s as “mourning humaneness”, bloating its abstraction. While M. Rothberg introduced the notion of “implicated subject” to the field/s of historical violence and injustices to modify R. Hilberg’s perpetrator-victim-bystander triad in 2019, the German “Historikerstreit 2.0” was raging, but not about Rothberg’s “implication”, yet about his 2009 concept of “multidirectional memory”, wherewith he demonstrated how the Holocaust had enabled the articulation of other histories of victimisation at the same time that it had been declared "unique" among human-perpetrated horrors, while uncovering the more surprising fact that public memory of the Holocaust emerged in part thanks to postwar events that seemingly had little to do with it."

As noted in a previous post, there's also the approach of Parallel Histories. You wonder from where dialogue can follow: Israel and Palestine ... but it must. On Wednesday the recent rioting impinged on proceedings with directions to close earlier and dining plans impacted. 

After too many years I must explore George Spencer-Brown's Laws of Form and try to apply it to Hodges' model as an additional and alternative theoretical resource.

The GSB Society have a forthcoming journal which I will post about here as details follow.

The next conference is in 2026 and will be based in Cambridge - a great prospective source of ideas.

v Book: 'Complexity in Health Care - A Paradigm Shift for Clinical Practice'

Chapter 11 held promise in the title 'Formalising the Clinical Field'.

If anyone is interested, formalisation is what I would like to focus upon - using Hodges' model - over the next several years (taking nothing for granted). If truth be told, I'd be stressed as if (true) formalisation was discovered here, I may find this is beyond me, but this is the course I have chosen.

There was nothing new, the 'clinical illustrations' continued. The reading is worthwhile, in trying to define complexity, or what constitutes a 'complex case', hence 'Each new entry expands the complexity and gravity of the case, moving it beyond "plain vanilla" of a single medical or socially based condition'. I was reminded here of the user personas used in developing online communities. And in health the way personalised detail gets lost as personal details - emotional content gets lost (necessarily) as data is aggregated. The chapter revists the definition of clinical complexity.

'So, how does this information fit with our tentative understanding of clinical complexity as "the potential for progress toward health recovery in the context of a particular set of diagnoses and available treatments" (Kathol et al. 2018)? The phrase "particular set of diagnoses" could be replaced by "clinical challenges?" After all, where do you fit cultural considerations or family disjunctions here? Neither are diagnoses per se. Both have typically been relegated to the periphery of diagnostic considerations. Instead, they are elements in a loose matrix of clinical influencers.' p.76. [My emphasis].

Well, Hodges' model provides an ideal place for cultural considerations and family disjunctions. But replacing 'particular set of diagnoses' with 'clinical challenges' will be met with a challenge itself. This serves my purpose in advocating for Hodges' model, if challenges across the model's four care/knowledge domains can be seen as 'clinical'.

Identity morphism

Part VI on Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity is an important lesson to look; then look again - beyond the (basic!) subjective-objective dichotomy. You want patients - clients to recover quickly. The clinical illustrations are helpfully carried forward, as per the longevity their being 'complex' portends. The fact that in a clinical conference, social aspects are barely mentioned is one rationale for use of Hodges' model in practice. What has not been discussed? For 'Seth' a case formulation is raised, (I sketched a 'simple'  triangle) and the limited conceptual scope acknowledged above (p.80). Reading, I did wonder what a new edition might look like given developments in the USA? Would it make a difference? There a question about to categorise one client. And I scribbled 'identity' in the summary for the subjectivity between client and clinician.

I've always liked archaic terms^ and here cussedness springs to mind as the authors seem compelled to return to the issue of a definition for complexity. You could say - they can't put it to bed! 'Lifestyle' is not indexed. But it is clear that the adopted lifestyle of many clients also compounds, contributes to the clinically complex presentation. Case, condition, set of sign/symptoms, state of affairs, situation - all may be simple or complex. On page 87 regards Mark: 'The management challenge of this situation is evident. The situation itself is not medically complex. However, managing it is.'

When I read the aforementioned formalisation (chapter 11), I thought logic might follow, a specific illustration? Abduction is a teaser introducing chapter 14. It is chapter 15 that inference including abduction is usefully discussed:

'Abduction goes further than obtaining general and specific logical conclusions. Abduction seeks explanations beyond logic. The clinician listens to the utterances of a patient and integrates word meanings and word referents with other gathered data. The clinician abductively decodes information and concocts potential explanations for the words of the patient that fit with aggregated clinical findings. This rational processing results in what the clinician considers the best explanation for the information at hand. However, other explanations remain as viable until and unless eliminated by subsequent data. The clinician using abductive reasoning always maintains an openness to changing explanations and an intention to expunge unsatisfactory conclusions as accumulating data dictate [1].' p.96.

The author's empirical-collaborative (E-C) approach spans the book. They might find that Hodges' model as a conceptual framework can seamlessly fit with E-C. A reference on Bayesian Statistics. Lee PM (2013), plus further reading is listed.

There is a spelling mistake p.73; 'contacted a disease'?

One more post to follow ... may add here also.

Thanks again to Daniela and colleagues at SpringerNature for the review copy. 

Steven A. Frankel, Steven D. Thurber, James A. Bourgeois (2023) Complexity in Health Care: A Paradigm Shift for Clinical Practice. Cham. Switzerland: Springer. ISBN: 978303114948. 

Image:

https://krossovochkin.com/posts/2020_04_26_category_theory/ 

 

^Which is ok, I'm a grandad now.