C-225. Where the mettles are
Where in the step are the mettles? So we can get to work on and with them to strengthen our steps. To make them available for behavioral architecture. To make them available for behavioral science. To make them available for Help’s relevance challenges.
In B-speak, Shakespeare’s tongue, mettle is a something (a B-ness) closeted away in the body’s belly (more B-ness), summoned to engage body with body (still more B-ness). Linguistically, mettle there is a noun. But what about mettle re the “engage,” the step? What and where is mettle in the step, linguistically speaking?
R-sense and R-technology can give us a useful answer. R-words (“R-speak”) share a language about steps in which all R-words share the same two “noun” and two “verb” phases: N-1: needed functionality; V-1: “intransitive” functionality; V-2: “transitive” functionality; N-2: achieved functionality.
We can talk about mettles as being in the “intransitive” of every R-word, right up front in the initiation of the step to meet what is called for (WICF) by the Involve of the Nature of Things.* (We now have a different, better Grasp, of Everything not just of every thing. A better Grasp, that is, using R-speak rather than B-speak as the what is said about [WISA] technology for WICF.) Mettles are about capabilities, some – but only some --derived from capacities by evolution and many more that might and ought to be developed via procedural technology, as here with R-technology.
The familiar Grasp we have of steps in B-speak is largely “transitive.” Steps there are “behaviors.” They are about particular practices, about the relationships between and among bodies. What is said about by B-speak (WISA tech) embodies B-ness. WICF, i.e., next step, is seen situationally, as if the Nature of Things had no more to say than what is said by the things of nature.
With R-technology we can see steps forming in response to the WICF of the Nature of Things as well as from calls by the things of nature. Most importantly, we can see the opportunity in R-speak’s V-1 phase to intervene technologically to introduce Compose (an R-word), to alloy mettles, strengthening the step, before utilizing them (ala Excalibur) situationally. We self-compose before we compose anything else. We finally give the behavioral problem, Pbeh, and the behavioral solution, Sbeh, their due.**
We have the foundation we need for building solutions: where the mettles are. Up front in the step. Where they need to be for the best next step.*** And given the Nature of Things’ incomplete step instruction – especially for making them.
And we have CEM principles and technology (e.g., ratios and the T-TT#) to maximize Forward development via step materiality – i.e., R-sense.
***
* Which is what Eve was calling for.
**Which was what the pragmatic precept, PP, when applied to “problem,” uncovered with respect to the Nature of Things vs. the things of nature.
*** QED: Behavioral foundations of effective problem solving (BFEPS.org).
# The Bayes theorem – or something like it – can test solution emergence – i.e., the alloy of mettles being Composed. In our alchemic moments we do have some sense of “getting closer to the solution.”
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2020 R. F. Carter
In B-speak, Shakespeare’s tongue, mettle is a something (a B-ness) closeted away in the body’s belly (more B-ness), summoned to engage body with body (still more B-ness). Linguistically, mettle there is a noun. But what about mettle re the “engage,” the step? What and where is mettle in the step, linguistically speaking?
R-sense and R-technology can give us a useful answer. R-words (“R-speak”) share a language about steps in which all R-words share the same two “noun” and two “verb” phases: N-1: needed functionality; V-1: “intransitive” functionality; V-2: “transitive” functionality; N-2: achieved functionality.
We can talk about mettles as being in the “intransitive” of every R-word, right up front in the initiation of the step to meet what is called for (WICF) by the Involve of the Nature of Things.* (We now have a different, better Grasp, of Everything not just of every thing. A better Grasp, that is, using R-speak rather than B-speak as the what is said about [WISA] technology for WICF.) Mettles are about capabilities, some – but only some --derived from capacities by evolution and many more that might and ought to be developed via procedural technology, as here with R-technology.
The familiar Grasp we have of steps in B-speak is largely “transitive.” Steps there are “behaviors.” They are about particular practices, about the relationships between and among bodies. What is said about by B-speak (WISA tech) embodies B-ness. WICF, i.e., next step, is seen situationally, as if the Nature of Things had no more to say than what is said by the things of nature.
With R-technology we can see steps forming in response to the WICF of the Nature of Things as well as from calls by the things of nature. Most importantly, we can see the opportunity in R-speak’s V-1 phase to intervene technologically to introduce Compose (an R-word), to alloy mettles, strengthening the step, before utilizing them (ala Excalibur) situationally. We self-compose before we compose anything else. We finally give the behavioral problem, Pbeh, and the behavioral solution, Sbeh, their due.**
We have the foundation we need for building solutions: where the mettles are. Up front in the step. Where they need to be for the best next step.*** And given the Nature of Things’ incomplete step instruction – especially for making them.
And we have CEM principles and technology (e.g., ratios and the T-TT#) to maximize Forward development via step materiality – i.e., R-sense.
* Which is what Eve was calling for.
**Which was what the pragmatic precept, PP, when applied to “problem,” uncovered with respect to the Nature of Things vs. the things of nature.
*** QED: Behavioral foundations of effective problem solving (BFEPS.org).
# The Bayes theorem – or something like it – can test solution emergence – i.e., the alloy of mettles being Composed. In our alchemic moments we do have some sense of “getting closer to the solution.”
In light of the very useful Search feature now available, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2020 R. F. Carter
S