[Inquiry] Re: Introduction to Inquiry Driven Systems

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

INTRO.  Note 3

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

1.1.  Preliminary Questions

Three questions immediately arise in the connection
between inquiry and computation.  As they reflect on
the very idea of inquiry, they have to do with its
integrity, its effectiveness, and its complexity.
These questions ask in their turn whether all such
processes that are dubbed "inquiry" have anything
essential in common, whether any useful parts of
these processes can be automated in practice, and
just how deep is the takedown needed to reach the
level of routine steps.  The issues of effectiveness
and complexity will be discussed throughout the rest
of this work, but the problem of integrity must be
dealt with immediately, since doubts about it may
interfere with my ability to exercise this title
to "inquiry".

Thus, we must examine the integrity, or well-definedness,
of the very idea of inquiry, that is, "inquiry" as a general
concept rather than a catch-all word.  Is the faculty of inquiry
a principled capacity, leading to a disciplined form of conduct,
or is it only a disjointed collection of unrelated skills?  As it
is currently being carried out on computers today, inquiry includes
everything from database searches, through dynamic simulation and
statistical reasoning, to mathematical theorem proving.  Insofar
as these tasks constitute specialized efforts, each of them demands
software that is tailored to its individual purpose.  Insofar as
these different modes of investigation contribute to larger
inquiries, our present methods for coordinating their separate
findings are mostly ad hoc and still a matter of human skill.
Thus, we might question whether the very name "inquiry" succeeds
in referring to a coherent and independent process.

Do all the varieties of inquiry have something in common, a structure
or a function that defines the essence of inquiry itself?  I will say
"yes".  One advantage of this answer is that it brings the topic of
inquiry within human scope, and also within my capacity to research.
Without this, the field of inquiry would be impossible for any one
human being to survey, because a person would have to cover the
union of all the areas that employ inquiry.  By grasping what is
shared by all inquiries, I can focus on the intersection of their
generating principles.  Another benefit of opting for this answer
is that it promises a common medium for inquiry, one in which the
many disparate pieces of our puzzling nature may be bound together
in a unified whole.

When I look at other examples of instruments that people have
used to extend their capacities, I see that two questions must
be faced.  First, what are the principles that enable human
performance?  Second, what are the principles that can be
augmented by available technology?  I will refer to these
two issues as the question of original principles and the
question of technical extensions, respectively.  Following
this model leads me to examine the human capacity for inquiry,
asking which of its principles can be reflected in the
computational medium, and which of its faculties can be
sharpened in the process.  It is not likely that everybody
with the same interests and applications would answer these
questions the same way, but I will describe how I approach
them, what has resulted so far, and what directions I plan
to explore next.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o