Jon:
Very interesting as usual. My initial response to the Primer was remembering a statement from my Grandmother:
"Figures don't lie, but liars figure."
Human beings need formal methods to support their limited natural ability in mathematics and logic.
Human beings use computers to help with the application of formal methods.
However, formal methods may be developed that have no connection to current empirical experience.
Computers may completely overwhelm humans with vast amounts of data that humans cannot process.
Computational methods (that have no logical connection to empirical evidence) may be applied to produce vast amounts of information that no one can validate.
We are now at the stage of believing the authority.
What motivates the authority? Power, position, wealth?
These types of formal systems may well be correct, but have no valid application in reality.
Some of these formal systems may even mask the empirical behavior at great cost to the individuals that apply these methods.
Your work on generic inquiry has components very similar to Warfield's work in generic design.
Warfield's work was more focused on the activity of system design.
Warfield's Quad and Tapestry structures are very similar to your descriptions.
Mary and I are now working a context of formal truth, value truth and factual truth.
Value truth is used to "validate" any given formal truth in the context of any given factual truth.
That is a way you can determine if the "figures" were produced by a liar.
Take care, be good to yourself and have fun,
Joe