Dialectical-Ontological Modeling of Primordial Generating Process ↔ Understand λόγος ↔Δ↔Logos & Count Quickly↔Ontological (Cosmic, Structural) Memory

Fundamental Science is undergoing an acute conceptual-paradigmatic crisis of philosophical foundations, manifested as a crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, “loss of certainty”, “trouble with physics”, and a methodological crisis. Fundamental Science rested in the "first-beginning", "first-structure", in "cogito ergo sum". The modern crisis is not only a crisis of the philosophical foundations of Fundamental Science, but there is a comprehensive crisis of knowledge, transforming by the beginning of the 21st century into a planetary existential crisis, which has exacerbated the question of the existence of Humanity and life on Earth. Due to the unsolved problem of justification of Mathematics, paradigm problems in Computational mathematics have arisen. It's time to return ↔ Into Dialectics. The solution to the problem of the foundations of Mathematics, and therefore knowledge in general, is the solution to the problem of modeling (constructing) the ontological basis of knowledge - the ontological model of the primordial generating process. The idea and model of the primordial generating process, its ontological structure directs thinking to the need for the introduction of superconcept → ontological (cosmic, structural) memory, concept-attractor, supercategory, substantial semantic core of the scientific picture of the world of the nuclear-ecological-information age. Model of basic Ideality→ “Space-MatterMemory-Time” [S-MM-T]

Dialectical-Ontological Modeling of Primordial Generating Process ↔ Understand λόγος ↔Δ↔Logos & Count Quickly↔Ontological (Cosmic, Structural) Memory

Fundamental Science is undergoing an acute conceptual-paradigmatic crisis of philosophical foundations, manifested as a crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, “loss of certainty”, “trouble with physics”, and a methodological crisis. Fundamental Science rested in the "first-beginning", "first-structure", in "cogito ergo sum". The modern crisis is not only a crisis of the philosophical foundations of Fundamental Science, but there is a comprehensive crisis of knowledge, transforming by the beginning of the 21st century into a planetary existential crisis, which has exacerbated the question of the existence of Humanity and life on Earth. Due to the unsolved problem of justification of Mathematics, paradigm problems in Computational mathematics have arisen. It's time to return ↔ Into Dialectics. The solution to the problem of the foundations of Mathematics, and therefore knowledge in general, is the solution to the problem of modeling (constructing) the ontological basis of knowledge - the ontological model of the primordial generating process. The idea and model of the primordial generating process, its ontological structure directs thinking to the need for the introduction of superconcept → ontological (cosmic, structural) memory, concept-attractor, supercategory, substantial semantic core of the scientific picture of the world of the nuclear-ecological-information age. Model of basic Ideality→ “Space-MatterMemory-Time” [S-MM-T]

Developing Ontological Theories for Conceptual Models using Qualitative Research

Conceptual modelling is believed to be at the core of the IS discipline. There have been attempts to develop theoretical foundations for conceptual models, in particular ontological models as axiomatic reference systems. Although the notion of ontology has become popular in modelling theories, criticism has risen as to its philosophical presuppositions. Taking on this criticism, we discuss the task of developing socially constructed ontologies for modelling domains and outline how to enhance the expressiveness of ontological modelling theories by developing them via qualitative research methods such as Grounded Theory

A formal theory of conceptual modeling universals

Conceptual Modeling is a discipline of great relevance to several areas in Computer Science. In a series of papers [1,2,3] we have been using the General Ontological Language (GOL) and its underlying upper level ontology, proposed in [4,5], to evaluate the ontological correctness of conceptual models and to develop guidelines for how the constructs of a modeling language (UML) should be used in conceptual modeling. In this paper, we focus on the modeling metaconcepts of classifiers and objects from an ontological point of view. We use a philosophically and psychologically well-founded theory of universals to propose a UML profile for Ontology Representation and Conceptual Modeling. The formal semantics of the proposed modeling elements is presented in a language of modal logics with quantification restricted to Sortal universals

IDEF5 Ontology Description Capture Method: Concept Paper

The results of research towards an ontology capture method referred to as IDEF5 are presented. Viewed simply as the study of what exists in a domain, ontology is an activity that can be understood to be at work across the full range of human inquiry prompted by the persistent effort to understand the world in which it has found itself - and which it has helped to shape. In the contest of information management, ontology is the task of extracting the structure of a given engineering, manufacturing, business, or logistical domain and storing it in an usable representational medium. A key to effective integration is a system ontology that can be accessed and modified across domains and which captures common features of the overall system relevant to the goals of the disparate domains. If the focus is on information integration, then the strongest motivation for ontology comes from the need to support data sharing and function interoperability. In the correct architecture, an enterprise ontology base would allow th e construction of an integrated environment in which legacy systems appear to be open architecture integrated resources. If the focus is on system/software development, then support for the rapid acquisition of reliable systems is perhaps the strongest motivation for ontology. Finally, ontological analysis was demonstrated to be an effective first step in the construction of robust knowledge based systems

On the future of astrostatistics: statistical foundations and statistical practice

This paper summarizes a presentation for a panel discussion on "The Future of Astrostatistics" held at the Statistical Challenges in Modern Astronomy V conference at Pennsylvania State University in June 2011. I argue that the emerging needs of astrostatistics may both motivate and benefit from fundamental developments in statistics. I highlight some recent work within statistics on fundamental topics relevant to astrostatistical practice, including the Bayesian/frequentist debate (and ideas for a synthesis), multilevel models, and multiple testing. As an important direction for future work in statistics, I emphasize that astronomers need a statistical framework that explicitly supports unfolding chains of discovery, with acquisition, cataloging, and modeling of data not seen as isolated tasks, but rather as parts of an ongoing, integrated sequence of analyses, with information and uncertainty propagating forward and backward through the chain. A prototypical example is surveying of astronomical populations, where source detection, demographic modeling, and the design of survey instruments and strategies all interact.Comment: 8 pp, 2 figures. To appear in "Statistical Challenges in Modern Astronomy V," (Lecture Notes in Statistics, Vol. 209), ed. Eric D. Feigelson and G. Jogesh Babu; publication planned for Sep 2012; see http://www.springer.com/statistics/book/978-1-4614-3519-

Philosophical foundations of the Death and Anti-Death discussion

Perhaps there has been no greater opportunity than in this “VOLUME FIFTEEN of our Death And Anti-Death set of anthologies” to write about how might think about life and how to avoid death. There are two reasons to discuss “life”, the first being enhancing our understanding of who we are and why we may be here in the Universe. The second is more practical: how humans meet the physical challenges brought about by the way they have interacted with their environment. Many persons discussing “life” beg the question about what “life” is. Surely, when one discusses how to overcome its opposite, death, they are not referring to another “living” thing such as a plant. There seems to be a commonality, though, and it is this commonality is one needing elaboration. It ostensibly seems to be the boundary condition separating what is completely passive (inert) from what attempts to maintain its integrity, as well as fulfilling other conditions we think “life” has. In our present discussion, there will be a reminder that it by no means has been unequivocally established what life really is by placing quotes around the word, namely, “life”. Consider it a tag representing a bundle of philosophical ideas that will be unpacked in this paper

Relationships and events: towards a general theory of reification and truthmaking.

We propose a novel ontological analysis of relations and relationships based on a re-visitation of a classic problem in the practice of knowledge repre- sentation and conceptual modeling, namely relationship reification. Our idea is that a relation holds in virtue of a relationship's existence. Relationships are therefore truthmakers of relations. In this paper we present a general theory or reification and truthmaking, and discuss the interplay between events and rela- tionships, suggesting that relationships are the focus of events, which emerge from the context (the scene) they occur in