Research Article
General Science
Philosophy
We are sorry, but we are not currently accepting applications for postings.
In addition, you can continue to use the publications you have published until now.
We are sorry, but we are not currently accepting applications for postings.
In addition, you can continue to use the publications you have published until now.
The development of communication systems in our organizations is probably today the primary cause of the acceleration of trade shares and thereby the growth of complexity. It is not always easy to distinguish the concepts of data, information, knowledge, communication and organization that they simply cannot pass each other in articulating more or less harmoniously. A real system is known through the information is circulated inside and outside the system. Under these conditions, a description of both epistemological, anthropological and ethical of data flow to a practical wisdom seems essential to develop a deeper understanding of how to evaluate the theoretical and practical implications in the communication within organizations. Thus, the transition complex and disorganized data (A) to a simplified and orderly practical wisdom (Ω) is achieved via a neo-platonic ethics systemic modeling (Ψ, G, Φ). This ethical evolution of human knowledge to practical wisdom results in flow amounts of information shannoniennes.
Keywords Ethics, Information, practical wisdom, Modeling, Organization
Author info
1) Keosys. France
2) UMR 7268 ADÉS, Aix-Marseille University/EFS/CNRS, Ethics Mediterranean area, Hôpital Adultes La Timone. France
3) LUNAM University France
4) Nantes University France
RecievedFeb 28 2014 AcceptedMay 9 2014 PublishedMay 21 2014
CitationBéranger J, Der-Sarkissian H (2014) The process of creating practical wisdom by neo-platonic ethics systemic modeling. Science Postprint 1(1): e00022. doi: 10.14340/spp.2014.05A0004
Copyright©2014 The Authors. Science Postprint is published by General Healthcare Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.1 Japan (CC BY-NC-ND 2.1 JP) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
FundingThis research is funded by the company Keosys. Jerone Béranger and Henri Der Sarkissian are employed for this company.
Competing interestThere is no conflict of interest relevant.
Donation massageYour support would be highly appreciated for our further research.
Corresponding authorJérôme Béranger
Address1) Keosys, Impasse Augustin Fresnel 44815 Saint-Herblain, France
2) UMR 7268 ADÉS, Aix-Marseille University/EFS/CNRS, Ethics Mediterranean area, Hôpital Adultes La Timone. 264 rue Saint Pierre, Marseille Cedex 05, France
E-mailIf you want to contact author,Please register as a member.
The fundamental question that we asked ourselves when our thoughts on the flow of data to practical wisdom gained within an organization is as follows: Which model is best suited to analyze, understand and improve the communication between people?
Computer ethics, far from being a form of realism of the information, is in fact a form of idealism information 1. Most theorists of communication attach great importance to the influence of time and place in the interpretation and use of information. In other words, the knowledge must be made available, construed and enforced in relation to a specific situation. For Bernard Miege 2, information is the cognitive and symbolic content of the communication. As for Daniel Bougnoux 3, it is also a content that he says it is full of meaning, communication is a relationship, one way to make sense of a complex knowledge.
Overall, the notion of complexity is based on the main idea that a system consisting of different parts form a whole which differs from the sum of its parts. The complexity is now part of a movement of thought that invites us to restore the understanding of the complexity in our cultures and ways of acting. It is a major epistemological problem for knowledge and action.
The unique analysis of the joints among the elements of a complex system is not enough. Now, it seems important to develop new thinking tools to better understand and anticipate mechanisms recursive logic, feedback, phenomena that make up a relative autonomy centered towards the creation of practical wisdom organization. Practical wisdom that the duty itself must pass the test of wise decision, prudent in the face of singular concrete situations. This can result in the means and procedures put in place to achieve the desired goals.
The complexity of an organization requires three powers:
This is a real challenge for human knowledge, from a theoretical and practical point of view. Thus, the process of developing practical wisdom can change from a state (A) complex knowledge, disorganized and unfocused to a state (Ω) of simple knowledge, structured and teleological. (See Figure 1)
To succeed in this transition to the simplification, we must use the right representation and modeling which consists in substituting a process description to a state description. This transformation is done through a neo-Platonic ethics modeling systems (Ψ, G, Φ) which integrates both:
Systemic modeling used to develop appropriate methods of making and legitimation taking into account the ethical issues underlying the event studied. Under these conditions, modeling allows us to better understand our experiences of relationships we have in the world, in other words to "transform our experiences in science with conscience" by Leonardo Da Vinci. This requires taking into account interactions both relational and cognitive with one hand, the methodology used to "learn how to" and, secondly, for the teleology "to understand what to do." Therefore, improved tools for thinking necessarily leads to an improved decision-making.
Representing our knowledge in complex models, features symbols that we develop, by which we analyze and exchange, we can master this knowledge by making them simpler and therefore more intelligible. The symbolism is part of the formalistic tradition of the Pythagoreans. According H.A Simon and A. Newell 5, the device symbol is "a combination of form and relationships, answering the question:" What makes a symbol symbolize? ". The research of practical wisdom helps tighten to entropy (S) very low, that is to say, a degree of disorder almost zero. The word "entropy" was introduced by Clausius and is derived from a Greek word meaning transformation. It still represents the complexity and therefore the potential disorder of a system, structure or organization.
Thus, we can understand the opening of knowledge in which humanity committed since its inception. This process of ethical legitimation of knowledge info-sphere associated with the pragmatism of the real environment, allows us to simplify our knowledge by approaching both a static manner by its environment and its dynamic interactions. According to Edgar Morin 6, ethics is inseparable from the complex knowledge: "knowledge linking, which expresses and builds therefore we want to or integral responsible citizen." It is therefore essential to focus the intelligence to combat the complexity of the world around us and ethics itself.
By nature, a complex system is a dynamic system with multiple interactions and feedbacks within which occur very difficult to predict and control process, that the classic design was unable to consider. The complexity of a system takes its consistency when its representation is understandable based on the paradigm of the Universe Built (axiomatic-inductive pragmatif). Thus this system incorporates a cognitive representation and a projective structure (or intentional) associated with teleology. It becomes projective or systemic (intentional-design).
This open system consists of an environment, functions, actions, teleology and transformations. Our model attempts to integrate and sustain reflections on this illustrious scholars such that: Aristotle, Archimedes, L. Vinci, F. Bacon, R. Descartes, Vico G.B, Claude Bernard, P. Valery G. Bachelard, J. Piaget, HA, Simon, E. Morin and J-L Lemoigne. This model incorporates some of the ideas of Leonardo da Vinci when the latter claimed that he had "done to understand and understand to do." For Maurice Blondel 7, "of thought to practice and practice to the thought, the circle must be closed in science because he is in life. The same is determined ... This double relation of knowledge and action. "
Under these conditions, the intrinsic strength of this model lies in its character both interactive, multidimensional, active-oriented sense, knowledge and teleology of an event. It consists of three distinct dimensions which are interrelated and interact with each other (See Table 1):
We have chosen to represent the state of the complex and simplified knowledge, respectively, by the Greek letters Alpha (A) and Omega (Ω) with respect to their symbolic aspect. Indeed, in the Christian tradition, A and Ω symbolizes the eternity of Christ, the Alpha (the first letter of the Greek alphabet), reflecting the beginning of everything (Cf. First chapter of the Gospel according to Saint Jean) and the Omega (the last letter of the Greek alphabet) showing the end of the world (Cf. Apocalypse of Saint Jean).
This metaphor has been taken up by the Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to represent human evolution from A to Ω. In probability, the Omega is the universe of possibilities. While in Euclidean geometry, it is the center of a similarity. That is to say, a transformation that multiplies all distances by a fixed constant called his report. The image of any figure in such an application is a similar figure, intuitively "the same shape." Finally, the traditional physical chemistry uses Ω symbol to indicate a state of equilibrium of a given system. All this reflects the idea of transforming a complex and chaotic initial state to a final state simplified and ordered, in other words, an ethical evolution of human knowledge to the practical wisdom:
f: A → Ω (with y = f(x) where A is the initial set and Ω is the set of arrival)
(S ≈ 1) (S ≈ 0)
x → y
This ethical conversion from A to Ω is fundamentally in our systems modeling (Ψ, G, Φ) which results in a transition matrix M(Ψ, G, Φ). According Quastler 8, we observe that in the representation of the information provided, the two systems do not communicate directly. They necessarily communicate by the non-neutral mediation, channel included in their communication.
Moreover, from the description of the transformation knowledge, we can also represent through fluxes of information that such conversion process involves, according to information theory of Claude Shannon. Indeed, "the amount of information (H) in a system is a measure of the degree of organization," wrote N. Wiener in his introduction of "Cybernetics" 9.
According to Edgar Morin 6, information is a physical reality that can be comparable to the energy. The latter is "indestructible (first law of thermodynamics), degradable (second principle), erythema (kinetic, thermal, chemical, electrical, etc.), convertible (mass, material)." The information is necessarily linked to the "concept of redundancy and noise" 6.
From this observation, measurement Shannonienne of amount of information that can be transmitted or lost in a system, indeed suggests an assessment of what appears to be the complexity of the system. The complexity assessment includes distribution probability of occurrence of behaviors or possible states (or entropy (S)), and thus taking into account their uncertainty. (See Figure 2)
H(A) → H(Ω)
H(A, Ω) = H(A) + H(Ψ, G, Φ) + HA(Ω) et H(A, Ω) = H(Ω) + HΩ(A)
With :
H(A) = Amount of information Shannoniennes the complex message;
H(Ω) = Amount of information Shannoniennes the simplified message;
H(A, Ω) = Channel modeling from A to Ω;
H(Ψ, G, Φ) = Amount of intentional information from modeling (Ψ, G, Φ);
HA(Ω) = Amount of unintentional information exogenous to the message, "emergences" produced by the organization;
HΩ(A) = Amount of unintentional information exogenous to the message, "noise" due to the equivocation of receipt;
T(A, Ω) = Complex message issued;
T(Ω, A) = Simplified message received.
Symbolically, the Ω receiver for a simplified know receives both less equivocation or "noise" (HΩ(A)) and more ambiguity or "emergence" (HA(Ω)) of unintentional information than it has sent the transmitter of knowledge a complex. At first glance, the loss and the gain of unintentional information have no reason to compensate. But insofar as this information transmitted is presumed essential to Ω for the conduct of knowledge conform to the project, we can see disappear expected behaviors (by ignorance "noise" related to the message issued) and unexpected behavior occur. The emergence of meaning and ethical aspects of the message via decoding organizational emergence.
Moreover, according to the study that we conducted in our doctoral thesis on "Analysis Model ethics IS healthy applied to cancer" and was the subject of an article in 2012 in the IRBM review the "Implementation ethics of information systems in oncology: Measure of the degree of applicability of the means and disorder (entropy). [Article in French]" 10 we have demonstrated that: E2 = M x E1
with:
E2 = Score ethics initial objectives of an information system
M = degree of applicability of ethics means
E1 = Score ethics of development an information system
If M = 1 (100% ethical means applied), then the entropy (S) = 0, and therefore E2 = E1.
This scenario may never be realized in practice on the ground. It is an ideal situation in which the ethical modeling is used optimally to remove the entropy (S) of a system in the process of communication of knowledge.
From this, we can say that M is our transition matrix (Ψ, G, Φ) which toggles a complex message A to a simplified message Ω without losing the meaning, purpose and therefore the ethics initial message.
Where: A = E1 and E2 = Ω
Therefore: Ω = M(Ψ, G, Φ) x A (1)
If you apply by analogy the formula of thermodynamics Gibbs (echoed by Claude Shannon in his information theory), we obtain:
Degree disorder = Entropy (S) = A x (1 − M(Ψ, G, Φ))
This shows that more information is used in our ethical modeling and more entropy (S) of a message decreases.
If we reason in terms of amount of information shannoniennes, the equation (1) means that:
H(Ω) = H(Ψ, G, Φ) + H(A)
Thus, the amount of information received message (H(Ω)) corresponds to the message sent (H(A)) to which relates the amount of intentional information of ethical modeling (Ψ, G, Φ). This gain intentional ethical information allows to order the different information and knowledge that make up the complex message A. This is a fundamental step for the message received Ω is both simplified, concise and purposeful from the transmitted message A. Under these conditions, we can say that Ω is the result of an ethical simplification of A.
In addition, from a mathematical point of view, we can translate this ethical simplification as follows:
If A, a set of complex and disordered knowledge with base denoted:
BA = (e1, e2, e3);
If Ω, a set of simple and orderly knowledge with ethical base named:
BΩ = (Ψ, G, Φ);
If M, the matrix of passage of the base BA to the base BΩ, then this transition matrix is used to move the complex state (A) Simplified state (Ω).
Ainsi, pour un message complexe α Є A, on associe un message simple ω Є Ω tel que :
Thus, for a complex message α Є A, is associated a simple message ω Є Ω such that:
Ω = M x α
In terms of amount of information, it gives:
H(ω) = H(M) + H(α)
H (M) represents the information provided by the base change (or change of representation). In other words, talking about the change of representation H(Ψ, G, Φ).
Note that Ψ, Φ and G are dimensions that are independent nature and interact. This means that M can tend towards orthogonality (that is to say, the optimization of its use) without ever reaching. If we continue our study on ethical scores that: E2 = M x E1. This means that M is trying to move towards one without ever succeeding. Indeed, if M = 1, then S = 0. But it is mechanically impossible to completely reduce the degree of disorder, or entropy (S) of a system.
We have defined the amount of information carried by the knowledge and change of representation of this knowledge: H(ω) = H(Ψ, G, Φ) + H(α)
Note: According Quastler, the message sent and received (common to A and Ω) is a symmetrical form. From this, we can say that:
T(A, Ω) = T(Ω, A)
| T(A, Ω) = T(Ω, A) | = | H(A, Ω) − HA(Ω) − H(Ψ, G, Φ) − HΩ(A) |
| or H(Ψ, G, Φ) | = | H(Ω) − H(A) |
| = | H(A, Ω) − HA(Ω) − H(Ω) + H(A) − HΩ(A) | |
| = | H(A) − HA(Ω) or H(A) = H(Ω) − H(Ψ, G, Φ) |
We have: T(A, Ω) = T(Ω, A) = H(Ω) − HA(Ω) − H(Ψ, G, Φ)
We see that the final message communicated via our ethical modeling has been simplified and reduced, while keeping the essence and meaning of the message initial output. Indeed, the amount of information included in the received message (T(Ω, A)) is significantly lower than that composed the message transmitted (T(A, Ω)). H(Ω) integrated unintentional information HA(Ω) the emergence of the organization as well as the ethical modeling H(Ψ, G, Φ) to synthesize a transmitted message received (T(Ω, A)) both ordered, concise and purposeful.
Note: The amount of unintentional external information to the message (HΩ(A)), "noise" is naturally separated from the final message received. This loss of information that comes from the equivocation of the reception, is a mechanical phenomenon in all transmissions of information.
In the light of this reasoning, we can say that the transition from the data (A) to the practical wisdom (Ω) results in the expression of amount of shannoniennes information following:
| Data | → | Practical wisdom |
| T(A, Ω) | → | T(Ω, A) |
| H(A) | → | H(Ω) − HA(Ω) − H(Ψ, G, Φ) |
This passage is by means of ethical modeling.
In the light of these results, it is observed that the system should be able to get itself a representation of the user to whom he is dealing, to fit him. For its part, the user tends to adapt to the system from the moment he understood that it caters to a machine, which shows the designer for the pragmatic advantage of simplifying certain aspects of dialogue.
The organization is active, self-organizing and is dependent and supportive environment. The organization also responds according to the information. Information is a stable configuration symbol is both Sign and Meaning. It allows the organization to adapt its behavior at every moment by regulation, to transform, to rebalance to be in harmony with the environmental parameters of the infosphere, the info-ethics and computosphere. (See Table 2)
Ultimately, the information gives rise to a continuous process of adjustment of the organization through the channels (the system adapts by accommodation) and codes (the system adapts by assimilation) communication over a project. To represent the organization, we propose a model consisting of a decision system, of an information system and an operating system.
Klimoski and Mohammed claim that knowledge is « a social process, where an individual's set of schemas arises from the social interaction with other individuals within a particular context » 11. Over time, this social interaction results « in shared knowledge structures among the individuals involved, and a shared understanding and meaning of ongoing phenomena » 12.
Direct communication provides knowledge called "tacit", very personal and hard to formalize 13. This knowledge has a technical dimension which corresponds to the personal skills, "know-how" and a cognitive dimension that encompasses the ideals, beliefs, perceptions, values, emotions 14 and models rooted thoughts in us. Although this knowledge is unconscious and difficult to communicate verbally, it is possible to acquire and share through shared experience or observation.
For its part, the modeling of information contributes to the emergence of knowledge called "explicit"speaking words or numbers, which will be more easily shared between people using verbal means or writings. It maintains a complementary relationship with the tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge has two sub-categories, firstly, the "explicit codified knowledge" found in documents or databases, on the other hand, the "explicit knowledge personalized" or "practical knowledge" that are not recorded and that is transmitted verbally. Knowledge is constructed, which requires frequent interactions between members of the organization. According Ikujiro Takeuchi and Nonaka Hirotoka 14, the individual interacts with the organization through knowledge. The knowledge development at three levels: the individual, group and organization.
Note that the transformation of data into knowledge by our neo-platonic ethic systemic modeling concerns mainly explicit knowledge.
In addition, the pyramid of knowledge involves control filters for each field of study (See Table 3)
It is from this perspective on the evolution of our information society, we have developed our model of ethical analysis applied to New information and communication technologies (NICT). Note that the idea of using mathematics to describe the "sensible world" seems to come from Pythagore and the Pythagoreans 15.
In summary, complex thinking loop attachment epistemology and anthropology. Epistemology can design anthropology, which is a prerequisite to a philosophical thought, which fits into a loop where each step is necessary to achieve an ethic.
Finally, cybernetics will rely on the info-ethics to develop Artificial Intelligence, that is to say, the evolutionary knowledge of expert systems to aid diagnosis.
In other words, these four macroscopic stages of society can be illustrated by a microscopic approach of an information system resulting in its design, implementation, use and development.
This approach leads us to re-explain the epistemological perspective that deploy a production organization and re appropriation of knowledge as is the case with health care facilities.
From these considerations, we can integrate our creative process of practical wisdom by the concept of organizational intelligence (See Figure 3).
The transition from the physical activity, the data (Alpha) to the practical wisdom (Omega) can also be characterized by the dialogic Erg (hardware) and Org (bodiless) involved in the interaction generating disorder - order. Erg is energy activity of system, constantly re-degeneration-Generescence involved in empowerment and eco-logisation. The Org is the neguentropic or informational activity of system, generating in the organization by the energetic activity of the system by developing three functions: computation, information storage and communication.
Organizational intelligence that enables this transformation includes the operation, information and decision. The person who processes the data must recognize its intrinsic value to acquire and assimilate.
This necessarily involves a transformation phase data. The use of information is made possible by the integration of dialectical theory and experience to provide knowledge that will be adapted to the situation. The application of this knowledge reflects the practical wisdom of the person.
In addition, the consistency of an organization is the central element of the complexity of an event or situation. It seems necessary to move towards a "poietic" knowledge (as Menon, Morin) who wants to be heuristic, functional endogenous genomic, Sfumato which connects and opens. The poetics is the study of the potential registrants in a situation that leads to a new creation. This is the active reliance is to learn to observe, to develop, to think, to act. To create the recursive loop, always replenished with knowledge and ideas, knowledge of knowledge. Thus, the knowledge of knowledge requires a complex thought, which necessarily requires intervention and reliance of Info-sphere (Informative dimension (G): Information), Real environment (Environmental dimension (Φ): operation), the Info-ethics (ethical dimension (Ψ): Decision) passing continuously into one another.
The transition from Alpha to Omega necessarily involves the reliance of pragmatic (Reasoning: congruence, cognitive interaction, Ingénium, satisficing, deliberation), the epistemic knowledge (interpret: recognition or reliance, dialogic, processing, recursion, hologramatic) and ethics (Modeling: symbolization, representation, teleology, systemic, multi-level organization) surrounding an event. If the pragmatic vision called ethical analysis, ethics refers to the epistemological study, called and active reflection on the experience expressed pragmatic. This can be illustrated by the sacrament of L. da Vinci: "Wisdom (science with consciousness) is the daughter of experience". This dynamic facilitates the transformation of personal knowledge into organizational knowledge 15, 16. The conversion process and knowledge creation of Nonaka is articulated in a specific context, through four conversions process are: socialization, externalization, combination and internalization seen previously.
Organizational intelligence of the complexity connects data, information and knowledge separated to move towards a practical wisdom. This intelligence of reality is a reconstruction and translation of this reality from a human mind. This is made possible by the Unitas multiplex organizational (UMO): Principle Meta representing a radiating core that centralizes, organizes and connects the triangulation (Ψ, G, Φ). This UMO translating "doing and thinking" articulates and integrates the "doing" (In which to understand. In what context?) of the Environment of the real, with the "well done" (To « why ». For which projects?) of the Given state and the Sensitive world, with the "make good" (To mobilize the intelligence. To what decision?) the Objective reality. The intelligibility of the action of an organization has the ability to maintain and keep (self-regulation) and connect and connect itself (self-reference) and produce and to produce itself (self poiesis). Thus, the formation of practical wisdom in an organizational intelligence behind a decision system.
In the light of this analysis, it seems essential to bring the center of the health organizations of philosophy, sociology and ethics, which are responsible for producing the conceptual tools leading to practical wisdom.
The ethics modeling of an information system to "human face" demands such confrontation and exchange of genres for which we begin the universal, abstract and general to lead to practical, concrete and particular. This vision reflects both the environment in which people work and communicate within an organization. All seek balance and harmony between the opposing forces of the universe.
As noted in the Canadian anthropologist Constance Classen 17, « the human body (singular) is a model for the cosmos (the general) and becomes a mediator between the cosmic forces. » Conflicts are resolved within a homogeneous order, partitioned space where people recognize and speak the same language. For Ricoeur, this resolution is related to the "practical wisdom" 18. Ultimately, it seems that this practical wisdom is characterized by the balance between rules, competing values that span various industries, worlds of action. Wisdom requires « knowledge but not necessarily a great accumulation of it. Wisdom is critically dependent on ethics, judgment, insight, creativity, and other transcendent forms of human intellection. Wisdom is concerned less with how much we know and more with what we do and how we act. Wisdom is a way of being and is fundamentally practical in a complex and uncertain world » 19. We believe this decision modeling and ethical concepts related to it have, themselves, a force capable of influencing the thinking and lasting change in the process of communication within an organization.
As a result, this model shows that NICT and processes governing the information to be put at the service of people who use them and not vice versa - which often seems to be the case.
It is on this basis that we seek to lay the foundations for an ethical own information systems. This neo-platonic systemic modeling is therefore a tool for translation of technical language (Alpha (A)) to an ethical language (Omega (Ω)), and vice versa. It allows the conjunction between the "info-signal" technology and the ethics advocated by the "info-meaning" dictated by ethics.
This analysis was conducted in collaboration with the company Keosys and Ethics Mediterranean area. Prof. Pierre Le Coz has helped us to deepen the ethical aspect of our research through its relevant comments and suggestions on the subject. Mr. Jerome Fortineau gave us the time and resources necessary to conduct this research. Thus, we dedicate them this article.
Jérôme Béranger: wrote the majority of the article: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion.
Henry Der Sarkissian: intervened in the results for the construction of the mathematical algorithm.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
