NSWG Analogy Discussion Sat. 2/18 noon CDT

[Curt McNamara]

Our next get together will be Sat. Feb. 18th to discuss analogy. Analogy is a key component of bio-inspired design, which engineers and SEs may use consciously or unconsciously. Software tools have been created to support the use of analogy in design.

Papers are here:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/j4sdk4jflrxsv45/AADEcCHI9dO4n3AtqrYutuy6a?dl=0

The titles are:
Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy
Dedre Gentner

Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity
Dedre Gentner and Arthur B. Markman

Design, Analogy, and Creativity
Ashok K. Goel, Georgia Institute of Technology

The expectation is that attendees will have spent some time looking at these papers. We will provide a brief overview of key points, and then have a round-robin discussion.

In March Gary Smith will present a webinar on the application of analogy.

We plan to have more of these informal discussions. Please let us know if you have a topic of interest.

                      Curt

JOIN WEBEX MEETING
https://incose.webex.com/join/webex16
Meeting Number: 258 497 038

JOIN BY PHONE
1-1-866-398-2885 Call-in toll-free number (Premiere)
Audio Passcode: 346 847 5607

[James Martin]

For those who don't know what NSWG means, it stands for Natural Systems Working Group. For those who don't know what CDT means, it stands for Central Standard Time in the USA. (The CDT label is apparently an error since the D stands for Daylight Savings, which is only valid during US summer time.)

Therefore, the start time for this discussion will be:

19:00. Europe time

13:00. US Eastern time

12:00. US Central time

10:00. US Pacific time

Regards,

James

Sent from my iPad

--
The SysSciWG wiki is at https://sites.google.com/site/syssciwg/.
 
Contributions to the discussion are licensed by authors under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sys Sci Discussion List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syssciwg+u...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syssciwg.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Steven Krane]

Perhaps of interest is Hofstadter's view of analogy

https://www.amazon.com/Surfaces-Essences-Analogy-Fuel-Thinking/dp/0465018475#productDescription_secondary_view_div_1487440210456

Sent from my iPhone

[Aleksandar Malečić]

The presentation was good, but maybe it would be even better if that mind map were still visible.

Authors like Douglas Hofstadter are relevant until they aren't. His strange loops are an interesting suggestion, but his opinion that it's obvious that we are deterministic and without any free will is an obstacle (especially if he is wrong about that). He almost suggests a physical and embodied or context-dependent kind of computation and information, but not quite.

Aleksandar

[Richard Martin]

The work of John Sowa and Arun Majumdar should also be of interest – Analogical Reasoning at  http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/analog.htm

 

Cheers,

Richard

[Jack Ring]

Thanks, Richard. This paper from 2003 addresses the modes of analogy, explicitly Simile (likeness) and less obviously Metaphor (equivalence, i.e. effect) which duality may be seen as class and type. Reinforces that notion that analogical reasoning is about how we perceive and conceive, not necessarily what’s out there.

Jack

[Aleksandar Malečić]

Thanks, Richard. This paper from 2003 addresses the modes of analogy, explicitly Simile (likeness) and less obviously Metaphor (equivalence, i.e. effect) which duality may be seen as class and type. Reinforces that notion that analogical reasoning is about how we perceive and conceive, not necessarily what’s out there.

That's what James Ladyman (he was our guest here on my invitation) calls naturalized metaphysics, an approach that shows no mercy and respect for any big or legendary names (especially those who weren't able to know what people can learn and read about now), but is rather focused on figuring out what is out there. But it is inevitable that people will for a while argue for instance about for instance determinism. Speaking of John Sowa - note "was" n the overview of VivoMind
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=108537903 and the website reduced to a single page: http://www.vivomind.net/

I don't see that map from the presentation. Is it just me who would like to see it again?

Aleksandar

[Curt McNamara]

Thanks! I think you also mentioned category theory. The books i have seen on the subject get into classes of mathematical "objects" fairly quickly. Do you know of a more general overview?

    Curt

[Steven Krane]

If you are open to a refutation of the classical, objectivist, theory of categories (all members of the set share a property), try “Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things”, Lakoff.

Steve

[Richard Martin]

Curt,

 

Have you considered this one:

Conceptual Mathematics: A First Introduction to Categories

By F. William Lawvere, Stephen H. Schanuel

 

Cheers,

Richard