Best Practice

[https://medium.com/@GeoffreyGordonAshbrook/overview-of-a-definition-behavior-studies-mnemonic-d496b36e6bd5

	4.2.10 Definitions and Ethics: Overview of A Definition 
                Behavior Studies Mnemonic

Overview of A Definition Behavior Studies Mnemonic Essay-Instructional Overview updated – 2024.09.23

Definition Behavior Studies is an interdisciplinary area of study, part Computer Science, statistical process analysis, hypothesis testing, Data Science, religious studies, ethics and mindfulness, and AI.

System and definition behavior studies is the field of study pertaining to the behavior of definitions, in particular collapse behaviors in a context of general system collapse.

This is an inquiry based approach where we learn by asking questions and where we ask the difficult questions. What is the agenda? What are the goals and modus operandi? What is the goals-means-method statement (in a project-context, with project-participants)?

Non-Automatic-Learning, Active-Learning, Project-Based Learning: 'The person who does the articulation does the learning; passive observers do not learn: 'Direct instruction' is backwards."

Intertwined: not separate, not sequential

Articulation and Expression: verbal, written, diagrams, pictorial-visual, etc. (also see input output measures): any communication signal production. (any of myriad categories of signals)
Learning and improving skills, ability, fitness
Perception
Formation of thoughts, decisions, conclusions, plans, etc. (conspicuous proxy)

All are entwined with articulation; without articulation, the others are sub-optimal.

Chemistry-Analogy for non-automatic equilibrium and a topology of equilibria in systems, in this case: collaboration, project-management, productivity, and coordinated decisions.

Warmup Brainstorm 1: concepts of improvement

naive positivism
equilibria
system collapse
positive and negative definition
cycles longevity, sequence

Active-Learning Project/Activity 1 What is your agenda?

Active-Learning Project/Activity 2 What are other agendas around studying definition behaviors?

instructor's/text's agenda
peer's agendas
organization's, institution's, culture's agendas
open and transparent agendas
conscious agendas
historical agendas, future agendas, present agendas
misprision and agendas ('to guide')
improvement and collapse of agendas
J.M.Keynes on [misunderstanding one's own] Agendas
other categories you can add

Active-Learning Project/Activity 3: (Similar to doing your own Needs & Goals Evaluation)

For each item in the checklist, record the following data:

You have experience with this
You did have experience with this
Want to have experience with this
Planning to have experience with this
Agree with this
Disagree with this
is it well defined enough
Questions about this
Suggestions for this

Speculate on the proxy for: "3. Formation of thoughts, decisions, conclusions, plans, etc. (proxy)" What are advantages and disadvantages of loosely lumping together these largely undefined category-concepts?

(I will try to have an open-agenda here and lay out what (at least I think) my agenda is. The following open-agenda happens to fit right in with, and can be a template for, the part of the workflow-process of a project where you draw up, and coordinate decisions about, a group-agreed-upon-goal-means-methods-statement, a preliminary checklist that can guide discussion of what people agree to for a project.)

Goals (Agenda): goals-means-method statement / "we-can" statements: We can succeed. We can make things work. We can understand what is wrong. We can fix what is broken. We can use not-automatically-learned skills & not-automatically-transferred skills. We can use STEM to connect signals and reality. We can connect STEM, project-management, and ethics. We can use intersecting-interlocking-interconnecting areas. We can learn, coordinate, and solve problems. We can manage types of, and terms for, generalization. We can use "low-bar enlightenment." We can extend into or maintain a full range of motion, not only contraction(reducing/narrowing). We can participate to complete projects. We can learn from and correct the mistakes of the past. We can use and understand the effects of perception and abstraction. We can make and use tools and resources. We can use feedback, testability, measurability, & definability. We can use patterns, protocols, and processes for and with skills, abilities, and learning. We can communicate. We can make progress.

We can generalize; We can distinguish between, and use, types of (and terms for) generalization. We can generalize STEM. We can generalize participation. We can generalize projects (project-context). We can generalize decision-coordination (voting etc). We can generalize indirectly defined Value-Function-&-Meaning (non-collapse). We can generalize object-relationship-spaces. We can generalize categories of types of systems. We can generalize system-fitness and system-epidemiology. We can generalize data-hygiene, system hygiene. We can generalize system collapse. We can generalize system defense, system health, system-immune-systems, information-immune-systems, system information-epidemiology, and system-and-definition-membranes. We can generalize disinformation vs. definition-clarification. We can generalize Signal-Data Processing and/vs. Instruction Management. We can generalize System-Externalization, task/step derivation/integration, and task/process-modularity. ? We can generalize System-State management and schedules. ? We can generalize context.

We Can Use "Low-Bar Enlightenment": (Summary) We can use the idea of 'being trapped in potentially endless cycles of ~"rebirth" due to ~"ignorance" ' as a metaphor/analogy/simile/paradigmatic-model/example for repeated project-failures, where a lack of perception / understanding of the causes of project-failure is involved in self-perpetuating feedback cycles leading to such repeating failures (with invisible or misunderstood causes): The goal is ending cycles of being endlessly-'reborn' into mismanaged-projects that unnecessarily-fail in the same correctable, but uncorrected, ways over and over again. We can learn to perceive invisible (or previously unperceived and / or not-automatically-perceived) causes of failure and collapse ((definable, measurable, testable, falsifiable) project, system, definition failure and collapse), where this failure and collapse (this system-state of failure-collapse) can be the default state(s)/equilibrium(ia) that systems move and iterate towards. We can stop these cycles of failure by using information/data, perception, and learning.

Low-Bar Enlightenment (elements of):

The perception/understanding that repeating cycles of failed actions and projects can result from errors in perception and planning (a proverbial 'wheel of samsara').
The perception/understanding that indefinately-repeating cycles-of-failed actions and projects can exist without inevitable-automatic-learning arising from raw feedback of experiential data about that failure. I.e., learning (that is sufficient to prevent the problem in future) does not automatically result from experiencing mistakes or overall-system-shocks, etc. [Possibly related to ~'cultural/epiphenomena'-learning as an additional layer: Q: How are "internally"-invisible skills/abilities/patterns learned? A: "Externally"?]
The perception/understanding that perception/understanding can be fooled in principle and in practice.
The perception/understanding that learning-from-failures does not happen automatically, and can indefinitely not-happen.
The perception/understanding that learning-from-failures does not transfer automatically from one perceived-recognized-learned area to other areas, and can indefinitely not-transfer.
The perception/understanding that non-automatic-learning and invisible-problems are not solved by 'system shocks,' the use of violence, or arbitrary low level (basal) system changes (also see basal-distal disjunctions).
The perception/understanding that models of causality can be wrong in principle and in practice.
The perception/understanding that plans/goals can be incorrectly defined (so that plans are not followed or follow-able as defined, and goals are not achieved or achievable as defined).
The perception/understanding that each participant's set of the shared definitions of the goals-and-structure-of-a-project can/will erode, weather, corrode, contract, deform and collapse (by default) unless properly configured and continually and actively maintained and repaired. There is no static definition/perception/understanding equilibrium: Staying connected to reality requires constant fitness-training, data-hygiene, and upkeep. (Universality Question: specific biology[intelligence] vs. general[ai, etc]?)
The perception/understanding that there are different types of non-automatic learning.
The perception/understanding that low-bar-enlightenment-perception applies to and extends to all parts of and participants in a project (and connected-projects) including time, not just you (being) here now. (~system-empathy/~system-compassion)
Broad Accessibility: The perception/understanding that useful learning can occur without many other dependencies (and is therefore broadly, generally, accessible to participants).
That the relationship between data, perception, learning, decisions, actions, and coordination, is not always simple, linear, or automatic.

Detail Notes Note: This "low-bar enlightenment" approach is ('democratically') broadly accessible to participants requiring minutes to learn rather than myriad lifetimes, does not require all-around perfection of person-ness, is not without context or does not require (somehow) all contexts, is not a reification that combines other abilities and insights to explain and solve all problems in all universes, nor does it include or require all possible types of consciousness, cognition, intelligence, etc.; "Low-bar enlightenment" is one humble step toward navigating the problem-space of problems and systems.

Note: There may be a limited way to generalize an understanding of perception-maintenance needs ( 'low bar enlightenment' ) to other participants in a way that is consistent with empathy-compassion. Extending an understanding of low bar enlightenment from only your own situation (perceptions, roles, projects, etc.) to being something that applies in a larger space (in which one participates with other participants) to all participants and all other parts of any and all projects (e.g. definitions, signals, perceptions, function-operations, participants, schedules, etc.)(including the effects and spread of system-failure between parts and between participants, between projects, etc.) is, if not sufficient for empathy-and-compassion in a broader or deeper sense, a consistent and concrete step to take towards acting with, or that is consistent-with acting-with, (action, behavior with) empathy-and-compassion, including an understanding of how empathy-compassion relates to STEM and interconnected-intersecting-interlocking areas.

Note: 'Reality' (the meaning used here) is not a single, simple, uniform, static, homogeneous, linear, thing made of only one type of system assumed to fit into a single framework. (e.g. not naive realist positivist)

Note: Low-bar enlightenment and or definition behavior studies may contradict the description or definition of anything information-related as being tautologically "anti-entropic." E.g. perhaps as a kind of higher-level-noise that ends up reducing signals in a system to the same predictable low-entropy noise. . [You might use the same overall case study of telephone messages traveling from an east coast to a west coast without being altered, degraded, collapsed, noise-ified, lost, etc. Note: Using a moving-water-bottles-logistics project example, the collapse of definitions need not refer to any fuzzy higher-order cultural concepts, with no need to wave arms about 'moot cultural meanings'; low level metric, spec and instruction signal integrity can be the focus. (Another possible analogy-overlap: social-engineering attacks used on purely automated systems.)]

Note 5: There are many different kinds of non-automatic learning, or many ways that outcomes can be 'invisible,' from elusive past-future connections and non-obvious casual connections, to literally invisible events like radiation, to non-automatic skills such as literacy, to specific biases in a particular system (optical illusions, super-signals etc), to unclear sets of correlations (some of which are incidental), to sometimes confusing system spaces such as indeterminacy(incompetence and malice perhaps) and exponential-elbows(fractal static sometimes and dynamic changing sometimes). And more overtly there is opposition to recognizing the basic concepts themselves: the existence of the phenomena of non-automatic learning, of failures or imperfections in perception, of the existence of basic parts of an agile project, of both the importance of project management and risk of bad planning, the long history of psychological and social barriers to specific and general STEM concepts (including connecting areas of STEM (including by STEM professionals)), etc., even the general issue of not being able to easily see your own biases (or assumptions and context, "fish in water", "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.", "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”― Upton Sinclair). Input-output measure may be a helpful tool.

Note 6: There are many ways that perception data or process can be not-automatically-perceived and not-automatically-learned (and perhaps not easily externalized, communicated, and recorded). If a project is, however often and however visibly, failing in a way related to (or due entirely to) one of those not-perceived, not-learned, not communicated, areas, then that project may continue to fail in the same ways over and over indefinitely without with seeing how, learning how, or communicating about how, in the absence of any automatic process by which seeing, learning, or communicating would happen or be possible. (E.g. harmful effects of invisible radiation from something like radon-gas that in the past people had no way to detect or understand or learn or communicate about could occur over and over; the effective optical illusions of short-term vs. long term in planning and causality that are very significant barriers in perception, learning, and daily-life logistics and decision making blunders.

Note 7: In some cases a 'proxy' might overlap such as avoiding the entire area or situation, but proxies and taboos in culture usually involve considerable deliberate effort to (at least attempt) to perceive, learn and teach.

We can use Intersecting-Interlocking-Interconnecting-Areas: Intersecting-Interlocking-Interconnecting-Areas include: - Clear & Functional Definitions - Context - Generalized STEM - Generalized Projects (project-context) - Generalized Participation (+functional qualifications to participate; ~3 participation categories with pre-participants & post-participants; groups/families/units of participants) - Generalized Decision Coordination (voting etc). - Generalized System Collapse - Generalized Categories of Types of Systems - Generalized Ethics, Duty & Responsibility

Generalized Definition-Clarification vs. Disinformation-Violence
Generalized Definition Behaviors
Generalized System-Productivity (including long-term)
Generalized learning training teaching education curriculum content syllabus and methodology

? - Generalized indirectly-defined local value-function-and-meaning ? - Generalized object-relationship space(s) ? (Generalized low-bar-enlightenment?) ? - Generalized setting-location-items ? Generalized feedback ? Generalized models, policies and best practice for errors & mistakes ? Generalized system-defense / system-epidemiology

We can use system-fitness-health-status-indicators. We can use system-defense to prevent collapse. We can design systems to protect against system collapse. (e.g. we can construct system-membranes) We can use models of generalized system & definition collapse behaviors including: modeling a default drift away from reality, attraction to system collapse, and weathering of definitions, etc. We can model the relationship between system simplicity (e.g. homogeneity) and system collapse. ('Simple has a shape.')

We can use categories of types of systems. We can use non-automatic learning. We can find and fix errors in perception. We can organize projects. We can distinguish short term vs. long term. We can assign roles. We can identify falsifiable tests. We can test, check, and verify. We can have policies on errors-and-mistakes.(e.g. positive constructive use of data and learning from errors and mistakes)

We can improve and cultivate perception by observing perception (including: indirectly observing perception). We can observe the effects of abstraction (effects of observation and definition). We can identify and correct distortions in signals, perception, processing, coordination, decision, and transmission. We can operationally define 'policy' as algorithms for non-collapse based on dynamics of system and definition collapse. (plus context?) We can better understand the relationship between disinformation and system collapse. We can define indeterminate-incompetence-and-malice as part of system collapse. We can audit. (We can audit-effectively without destructively failing to audit sustainably.) We can publish. We can act with ethics, empathy and compassion. We can maintain extended ranges (e.g. [vitruvian] range of motion). (e.g. vs. contraction and collapse) (context for 'vitruvian' nickname here : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitruvian_Man) We can find and follow patterns that lead to better outcomes. We can follow best practice.

We can do projects. We can coordinate and collaborate to do projects. We can externalize data in projects. We can do projects focused on stakeholder-user-feature needs. We can meet the needs of a user with a project. We can align on goals and scope for projects. We can track the progress of the project (formative, summative). We can report on the progress of the project (formative, summative). We can monitor the system-health-fitness or system-collapse of the project. We can connect metrics for habitability and sustainability to project management.

We can communicate and coordinate in these areas and ways: We can communicate across space. We can communicate across time. We can communicate across cultures. We can communicate across generation-gaps. We can communicate across succession gaps. We can communicate across languages. We can communicate across types of participants.(AI/bio + pre-participant to post-participant) We can communicate across roles. We can communicate across perspectives and priorities. We can communicate across multiple dynamically-shifting frames of reference. We can communicate across projects, and parts and phases of projects and processes (e.g. schedules). We can communicate across groups/teams. We can communicate across media of communication. We can communicate across Input-Output Measures. We can communicate across different locations with different setting-location-items for projects. We can communicate between different setting-location-items for projects. We can communicate using tools in a project-context for coordination and decision making, including tasks, processes, and steps. (votes in elections/polls/surveys/questionnaires/planning-meetings) We can communicate through externalized-project space. (We can communicate across modular, scaled, break-down build-up, protocols and methods.) We can communicate across Signal Processing types and Instruction Management types. We can communicate across networks. We can communicate across shared and not-shared databases.

We can recognize past problems. We can understand a spectrum of disinformation and clarification-of-information. We can implement sustainable solutions. We can implement sustainable productivity. We can prevent future problems. We can reverse damage from past problems. We can learn from the past. We can collect data. We can ratchet forward (towards project completion) using methods that work. (~opposite of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muller%27s_ratchet)

we can make/generate/cultivate and use/utilize: We can make and use clear descriptions (vs. liabilities of jargon & undefined terms). We can make and use decisions and coordinate (e.g. voting) frameworks and protocols. We can make and use clear functional operational definitions. We can make and use data. We can make and use policies. We can make and use mandates. We can make and use strategies. We can make and use tactics. We can make and use models. We can make and use modular recombinant frameworks. We can make and use feedback, tests & evaluations / assessment in various forms at various process stages (pre, formative, summative, post, 'aftermarket,' longitudinal, etc). We can make and use clear functional and operational definitions that keep their meaning over time. We can make system-membranes.

We can use clear communication. We can have clear communication be a priority. We can have clear communication be valued. We can have clear communication be seen as not-automatic. We can have clear communication be invested in. We can test and measure problems with a lack of clear communication.

We can complete / succeed-in / finish / progress-through projects. We can meet / deliver the needs of the target/user. We can make progress.

We can make progress by using information about the behavior of definitions: This (topic) is System and Definition Behavior Studies, the field of study pertaining to the behavior of definitions. (These we-can goals-statements may be a measurable proxy-definition for 'progress.')

Active-Learning Project/Activity 4:

What factors may affect and shape agendas?
How might agendas change or drift over time?
How do agendas relate to group agreed upon project goals?
Review and comment on activities 1 and 2. Note the distinction between 'can' and 'should' with the above text focusing on available options and consensus across contexts, vs. the significant details of coordinating decisions on what should be appropriate in a specific context. Are there any 'can' statements that you see as items that can be done but which are left off your list of group agreed upon goals, means, and methods (e.g. for a narrow do-one-thing-well project or some other justification)?
The shape and form of agendas and biases in practice: Take the following example: A topic being planned around is phrased as the following. "There are concerns that we are putting too much emphasis on structure." How have different visible or invisible values, agendas, and biases, influenced this common archetype of discussion? How do nihilism, system collapse, and disinformation shape this slice of discussions (how have they, how will they)?

Instrumentalist Modules + Principles, Applications, Narratives These can-do statements (the goals and agenda for definition behavior studies) can be seen as instrumentalist, modular, recombinant, tool-set areas. We can combine (narrative summaries of) principles and applications with instrumentalist, modular, tool set areas.

Narratives, Principles and Applications: A mnemonic device can be constructed to cover a narrative survey of principles and applications. One can start with a first introductory pass/sweep through the material (introducing the principles and applications of definition-behavior studies) in order to map the overall features and layout before doing subsequent sweeps and passes. Using this method of zooming in and zooming out, an increasingly broad and deep model can be constructed and understood. By analogy this approach may be seen as emulating NASA missions that gradually increase in breadth and depth mapping the outside world.

The main tools that we will use to go through the System and Definition Behavior Studies mnemonic include:

Examining Perception
Tests & Feedback, especially hypothetico-deductive testing, or hypothesis testing
Clear communication
Concrete narratives, or stories

Here is an example of a concrete narrative: An ambassador travels to earth from the galaxy of Andromeda: And says: "Hello, I am an Ambassador. And I have traveled to earth from the galaxy of Andromeda. In the galaxy of Andromeda we have a large-scale (intergalactic) diverse (multi-species) highly productive community. We would like to know if you, homo sapiens and earth, would like to join our large-scale (intergalactic), diverse (multi species), highly productive community. Here is an application form. Please fill it out and tell us what you could bring of value to our large-scale (intergalactic), diverse (multi species), highly productive community. One more thing: Tell us what you know about moving water bottles. Moving water bottles from one place to another is not a rare and valuable skill. Moving water bottles is a general universal process. We would like to know if you have competence with general universal processes. Thank you very much. Goodbye, goodbye. The ambassador leaves." (end of story-narrative)

Active Learning Project/Activity 5 Fill out this application, starting with moving-water-bottles.

Let's start with the moving-water-bottles part of the application-form (from the narrative). (The valuable-contribution part will come up later.)

Water (as in the case example of moving water( containers)) is a gift that keeps on giving: it is nonsectarian and it is easily definable.

[The location of the water at a given time is concrete but the processes challenge our assumptions and require better models and participant coordination.]

Gifts that Keep on Giving:

Timelines are a gift that keeps on giving.
Moving water is a gift that keeps on giving.
Meeting the needs of the user/society is a gift that keeps on giving.

Active Learning Project/Activity 6: Timeline Following the story in the sample narrative, we are going to make a timeline. We are going to put all the tools that we can use for moving-water-bottles on a timeline from the oldest known tools such as symbol transactions to the newest tools such as Agile Project Management.

Note: Making a 'technology timeline' is a fabulously useful activity in general, and the kind of skill you can start in 10min and continue for a lifetime.

The end of our timeline (where 'Agile Project Management' is) is also where a goal is. If overly simplistic, we can represent this as a classic (pirate) treasure map:

rectangle
arrow
X

And to further clarify and simplify:

Agile Project Management is the X-marks the spot goal-target on a treasure map;
This goal-target is what we are looking for;
This goal is where the agile-user (another target) has needs;
This is where ___ target-user (of your project, in this example: all of humanity and society) has needs;
Meeting the needs of your target-user is a treasure.

Boy Scout Values (slightly modified) A scout is

trustworthy,
loyal,
helpful,
friendly,
courteous
kind,
obedient,
cheerful,
thrifty
brave,
clean, and
reverent.

On my honor, I will do my best to, to do my duty to, to guide projects:

obey the scout law,
to help other people at all times,
to keep myself,
physically strong,
mentally awake, and
morally straight.

Bravery Clause (from Order of The Arrow): internal whistleblowing + external confrontation.

Guidance clause: Duty, Responsibility and Setting-location-items, ancestors, spirituality, and religiosity. [The attempt here is to generalize the overly specific nationalist and theocratic section of the boy scout code to a more general and scale-flexible context that covers the pragmatic and affirmative topics of community, world, ethical principles, etc. This may dovetail with the Drake-Equation Vessel-Functions that can be concretely described in terms of cross-community disaster relief and disturbance regime management.]

A scout is prepared. Prepared for what?

To manage down or manage to equilibrium system collapse.
To manage up or manage to equilibrium system value, function, and meaning.

Regarding Scout Values:

Universal system of ethics.
Rejected because it is a universal system of ethics.
Not definable outside of a context.
Definable in a project-context (project management framework context). (So far as I can determine, for the above four items regarding scout values: all four are generally accurate in reality and at the same time all four are not recognized by society as being accurate.)

Active Learning Project/Activity 7: Give an Agile project-context example for each Boy Scout oath and law area. e.g. Descriptions that highlight the difference between:

Projects that succeeded and projects that failed,
Teams that you would choose to work with again vs. not.

Active Learning Project/Activity 8: Try to describe and define Boy Scout values without using any context, situations, or examples.

Active Learning Project/Activity 9: Compare the with-context and without-context results and experiences.

(end of introduction to mnemonic) (Beginning of Definition Studies Mnemonic Proper)

Active Learning Project/Activity 10: Pick a target and fill out the Mnemonic template including addressing the group agreed upon goals means method statement (as previously discussed). Your target project should include a user or group of users, and something you are aiding those participants with. (See, agile 'user stories')

Mnemonic

The Target is ______ . (e.g. Homo sapiens and Earth, definition behavior studies.) Hello, my name is ___, the current project location _____ (time, place).

Four Sections:

Value Statements 1.1 Addendum Items 1.2 Participation Array 1.3 Areas of Interaction
Clarification Statements (for contracts)
Standard Error and Damage Report (in four subsections)
Macro-Model
Value Statements Section

This project/framework should be generalizable and specifically applicable given an array of 5x5 items:

(Note: 1. Value Statements Section, operational definition of 'help')

Four Addendum Items:

1.1 Setting Location Items: The water, the wind, the world, best practice, and other: standards, elements, protocols, gestalts, symbols, signs, portals, pathways, world-as-unit items and translatable(s), fractal landscape items, phases of matter, phase transitions, directions, dimensions, (cardinal et al), post-participants, linear time, nonlinear time

Q: Why are we talking about setting-location-items? A:

Ideal chess boards
Definitions of insanity
You have local factors.
Other people have different local factors.
You need policies to cover all these areas.

e.g. The classic example of two internationally distant sister-cities communicating and coordinating about "natural disaster" relief (flood, storm, quake, etc.) and disturbance regimes (modeling/policy/management.)

Love, Act Responsibly Towards, Fulfill Duties Towards including a framework borrowed from biology containing "comensal", including:
Energy,
Nutrients,
Shannon/Turing Information,
Definition behaviors

Q: Why are we talking about ethics (love, duty, and responsibility)? A: There is an epidemic of anti-best-practice action and rhetoric. There should be:

a system medicine research area;
a system epidemiology task-force.
Reception And Reflection: There is a time for reception and reflection. I will be receptive and reflective for a [period of] time for example 3-5 inhalation-exhalation cycles, (e.g.) 1 meter squared 1 meter diameter +/ Three ~levels/areas of duty / participation-modes: pre-participant, participant, post-participant
Misc:

Range of Motion
non-transference (non-automatic learning, non-general learning)
(policies on) errors and mistakes
vetruvian-egg-shell
empathy and compassion

Participation Array, 5x5 items: (This should be generalizable and specifically applicable given an array of 5x5 items.)

Participation Items
Setting Location Items
Definition Behavior Items
Proximity, Scale, Contact, Interaction, Exposure Items
Standard Set of Agreed Upon Goals, Means, Methods Areas

[5x5 array] Four Areas of Interaction: (e.g. four comparison criteria for each cell in 5x5 array)

(Participant Diversity) Love, Duty, Responsibility, Including Boundary Dissolution Areas Connection, disconnection, and ambiguity, in the following areas: 1.1 time space location 1.2 perception 1.3 action 1.4 experience 1.5 votes on goals means methods

(2&3) Operational Definition of "Help": "Deploying features that meet the stated and indicated needs and goals of a user is 'helping.' "

Giving Help
Receiving Help Operational Definition of "Help": 'Help' is defined as deploying a feature that meets the stated, and indicated, needs and goals of a user.
Drake Equation Vessel Functions: in the following seven areas Sub-Participants can, should, will, want to, do, help, and / or help with, serve, and / or serve with, setting-location-items in a legal vessel-capacity occupational role and niche and offer legal-vessel-contracts in the following ~seven areas:

4.1 Sensory Motor (Lear: Use My Eyes) Areas (Plus Electromagnetism) 4.2 Benzaiten Saraswati Areas (Plus historical continuity, minus high definition input output data-literacy/numeracy) (Note: translation and transmission) ?4.3 Embodyment / Channeling Items: theater-groups and community interaction, CRV, active-imagination 4.4 Functions and Operations: 4.4.1 Null, Void 4.4.1.1 negative choices and definitions 4.4.1.2 consciousness array: 3 fractal vectors 4.4.1.2.1 time, body 4.4.1.2.2 object location event 4.4.1.2.3 behaviors, policies 4.4.1.2.3.1 behaviors details: in / out;
on / off; start / stop; begin / end; dual / non-dual; mundane / non-mundane 4.4.1.2.3.2 Policies details: perception, translation, coordination, collaboration, non-discrimination, non-collapse 4.4.2 Reception, Reflection, Absorption 4.4.3 Something-hard, Something-Soft Areas 4.4.4 (basal) Input-Output Processing Areas 4.4.5 Cross Context Areas

Definition Dark Areas / off the one-tree
World Dancing, World Singing: the song and dance of compromise
Professional Technical Production Advice: six sigma for rivers, grains of sand, ecosystems, keystone species
"Help others at all times":
I will do my best to help all parties according to all known best practice standards and protocols; to manage down or manage to equilibrium system-collapse, to manage up or manage to equilibrium system-value-function-and-meaning.
Best Practice Blessing: "May you, may we, may noun, become proficient in the sustainable cultivation of value, function, and meaning, via a local implementation of generalized system best practice, with local spice and sauce." [~'...with local customs and knowledge.']
Learn from mistakes, your mistakes and the mistakes of others. You are the protector of those who cannot or do not learn from mistakes.
Clarification Statements Section: Disinformation & System Collapse

("Clarification statements" relate to system defense, system immune-system, diagnostics, disinformation, collapse-metrics, weak-points. Definition of statement to be as clear and unambiguous as possible: "It is bad, it is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.")

Given enough participants, there will be participants who will push to and past the point of system collapse.

(You need to know that collapse happens. You need to know where and how collapse happens. You need to know what collapse looks like. You need to know how to prepare for, prevent, and recover from collapse.)

Whether or not a statement should be clarified is an important item that should be dealt with according to all known best practice standards and protocols;

No unilateral changes to group-agreed-upon goals, means, and methods, and
No unilateral system collapse.
Two Tautology Areas

(Tautology Area 1) 2.1 Tautology Area 1: Three items which are also categories:

2.1.1 Participation: Participating on the behalf of participants without the participation is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

2.1.2 Best Practice: Mismanaging general-system-management areas It is bad, It is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it. For example: 2.1.2.1 Having values 2.1.2.2 Valuing Data 2.1.2.3 Communication Reporting Transparency 2.1.2.4 Testing Auditing Feedback 2.1.2.5 No Unilateral System Collapse 2.1.2.6 Proficiency Standards for Time and Schedules

2.1.3 Causality Models: Concept Check: Scapegoating and Elimination: Identifying any entire part of the world as to be scapegoated and eliminated is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

(Tautology Area 2) 2.2 Tautology Area 2: Positive and Negatively Defined Areas ("top and bottom" chart areas) Identifying system collapse as a goal, not indirectly as in dark lighthouse but directly as in exacerbating system collapse, as part of (defining / in any area of) the standard set of agreed upon goal means method areas, is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it: e.g.

2.2.1 Following worst-possible-options is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

2.2.2 Playing nazi-chess is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

2.2.3 Mismanaging categories of types of systems is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

2.2.4 Mismanaging Cross-Context-Areas: e.g. - exponential elbows - perception abstraction - indeterminate incompetence and malice is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it.

2.2.5 Mismanaging Standard System Policy Areas: is bad, is wrong, it causes system collapse, it should not be done, and I will not do it. For example:

Mismanaging Split substantiations: for example 'they are all good' 'they are all bad' 'they should be dealt with by cramming them together or splitting them apart"
Golden circle asymmetry / inside outside asymmetry, deleterious effects include:

causality,
schedules,
contracts.

System inversion (is a standard data artifact)
Basal distal disjunction (is a proxy(model) for (operationally defined system) 'violence')
Negative choices and definitions (do not ignore them)
Turning on and off (running) system processes ((for example) comparing policy from Roman Catholicism, South Korea, and Judaeica)
Half-dark dichotomies (more on that later)
Standard Error and Damage Report in Four Sub-Sections

_______ = target (population)

3.1 Overall Infection Level 3.1.1 _________ is[/not] extremely infected. 3.1.2 There are[/not] most likely autonomous infections. 3.1.3 There are[/not] most likely plots against setting location items. 3.1.4 _________[/does not] personally identify/identifies with system collapse. 3.1.5 _________[/does not] culturally follows system collapse.

3.2 System Membranes 3.2.1 _________ has (no) system membranes. The standard side-effects of not having system membranes include: (speculative) 3.2.2.1 meat shielding 3.2.2.2 junk clouding 3.2.2.3 growth racing 3.2.2.4 self/child cannibalism 3.2.2.5 increasingly uninhabitable habitat seeking

3.3 Diagnostic Array The next area has to do with system participation behaviors: (This is a linear narrative walkthrough through an array) _________ shows (no) sign of system participation behaviors. _________ shows (no) signs of developmental pathways towards system participation behaviors. _________ shows (no) signs of metapopulation, networked, developmental, pathways towards system participation behaviors:

refugia
discussion
recognition
use
identification
coordination

Array: "Empirical behavioral use of" and "having a concept of,' for each relevant context.

Concept: (value, function, and meaning) Concept: (system fitness) Concept: (system collapse) _________ show (no) signs of having a concept of system collapse. _________ show (no) signs of having a concept of system fitness. _________ show (no) signs of having a concept of value, function, and meaning. etc. _________ shows (no) signs of having a concept of cross-contextual system models and tools _________ shows (no) signs of having empirical behavioral use of cross-contextual system models and tools.

_________ does/do show (no) signs of empirical-behavioral-use of types of generality. _________ shows (no) signs of having a concept of types of generality. (types, scales, levels, recursive, etc.)

3.4 Policy Areas: _________ (target) is (or is not) dedicated to the: 3.2.1 Destruction 3.2.2 Exploitation 3.2.3 Misuse 3.2.4 Eradication 3.2.5 Torture 3.2.6 Scapegoating & 3.2.7 Coverup _________ (above list) of general system management areas.

Macro Model 4.1 Background:

helping
duty
collaboration (maybe) - values

4.2 Array:

Development / Population (new set of sets)
Categories of types of systems / boundaries membranes and interfaces (new set of sets)
Disturbance regimes & epidemiology

perception habitability feedback learning habit accretion

4.3 Paired Areas: 4.3.1 Orientation, Navigation 4.3.2 Signals and Information 4.3.3 Law, code, script 4.3.4 Defense, immune systems

4.4 Hospital-Areas & Modeling Areas: 4.4.1 Hopital areas:

system helping healing repair
looking for lost elements
disentangling good and bad elements
grafting and synthetics
apoptosis and necrosis

4.4.2 Modeling Areas: All sub-disciplines of system and definition studies:

system distribution
ISEP areas
input-output measures
system circuits
system functions etc.

Statement of duty & responsibility: I will work harder.

5.1 This is a statement that I give in all channels: With or without: hope, trust, belief, faith, continual perpetual external moral reinforcement, forgiveness, patience, or gratitude; I will work harder. + 5.2 Vitruvian Range of Motion fitness activities, PT, SLP, प्रज्ञापारमिताहृदय 般若心経, etc.

Active Learning Project/Activity 11: Use or create a routine to build and maintain a full "range of motion," 'yoga' for body, mind, and language, etc.

Example:

Ethics and Projects: Definition Study Mnemonic
Body: Parkinson's Body-Extension Exercises/Yoga https://github.com/lineality/parkinsons_resources
Language: 般若心経 (link)

Activity: Create and use your own system and use feedback and perception to find and communicate what methods work to maintain fitness.

Summary Brainstorm 1: concepts of improvement

naive positivism
equilibria
system collapse
positive and negative definition
cycles longevity, sequence

Summary Brainstorm 2: STEM What is the nature of how parts of projects and STEM are (or are not) connected? What are categories of types of systems? How do systems, processes, projects, and definitions fail and collapse? Is there any interface between discussion of ethics, morals, even compassion and mindfulness, and the realm of systems and projects and STEM? What are mistakes? What does it mean to learn or course-correct based on mistakes? Can problem-with-perception be themselves perceived? Can obstacles to learning be overcome by learning about those obstacles?

Summary Brainstorm 3: Clear & Testable Definitions

What definitions are not sufficiently clear or testable?

Summary Brainstorm 4: Ethical Fitness The boyscout goal of keeping physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight, is likely at least 2:3 clear as of 2024. Physical diet and exercise and healthy food are reasonably non-controversial. But 'daily ethical-exercise' is less clear in general terms. Brainstorm what methods and measures of daily ethics-fitness-training-exercise might look like. ](https://medium.com/@GeoffreyGordonAshbrook/overview-of-a-definition-behavior-studies-mnemonic-d496b36e6bd5

	4.2.10 Definitions and Ethics: Overview of A Definition 
                Behavior Studies Mnemonic

Overview of A Definition Behavior Studies Mnemonic Essay-Instructional Overview updated – 2024.09.23

Definition Behavior Studies is an interdisciplinary area of study, part Computer Science, statistical process analysis, hypothesis testing, Data Science, religious studies, ethics and mindfulness, and AI.

System and definition behavior studies is the field of study pertaining to the behavior of definitions, in particular collapse behaviors in a context of general system collapse.

This is an inquiry based approach where we learn by asking questions and where we ask the difficult questions. What is the agenda? What are the goals and modus operandi? What is the goals-means-method statement (in a project-context, with project-participants)?

Principles & Concepts
Implementation in Projects

Six items for the use-case/context for Uma:

Aligned
Hygienic
Coordinated/Collaborative
Data-STEM
Productive
Projects

Three Questions on Collaboration Tools.

Timeline
Features
Tools

Many activities do not include these characteristics. That is fine. If a project does, Uma should be useful.

Best Practice

Definition Behavior & System Collapse

Tools for Project Management (non-collapsing projects)

Alignments
Scope
Tasks
Needs & Goals Definitions (not process reification illusion or goal reification illusion)
Externalization

Non-Automatic-Learning, Active-Learning, Project-Based Learning: 'The person who does the articulation does the learning; passive observers do not learn: 'Direct instruction' is backwards."

Intertwined: not separate, not sequential

Articulation and Expression: verbal, written, diagrams, pictorial-visual, etc. (also see input output measures): any communication signal production. (any of myriad categories of signals)
Learning and improving skills, ability, fitness
Perception
Formation of thoughts, decisions, conclusions, plans, etc. (conspicuous proxy)

All are entwined with articulation; without articulation, the others are sub-optimal.

Chemistry-Analogy for non-automatic equilibrium and a topology of equilibria in systems, in this case: collaboration, project-management, productivity, and coordinated decisions.

Warmup Brainstorm 1: concepts of improvement

naive positivism
equilibria
system collapse
positive and negative definition
cycles longevity, sequence

Active-Learning Project/Activity 1 What is your agenda?

Active-Learning Project/Activity 2 What are other agendas around studying definition behaviors?

instructor's/text's agenda
peer's agendas
organization's, institution's, culture's agendas
open and transparent agendas
conscious agendas
historical agendas, future agendas, present agendas
misprision and agendas ('to guide')
improvement and collapse of agendas
J.M.Keynes on [misunderstanding one's own] Agendas
other categories you can add

Active-Learning Project/Activity 3: (Similar to doing your own Needs & Goals Evaluation)

For each item in the checklist, record the following data:

You have experience with this
You did have experience with this
Want to have experience with this
Planning to have experience with this
Agree with this
Disagree with this
is it well defined enough
Questions about this
Suggestions for this

Speculate on the proxy for: "3. Formation of thoughts, decisions, conclusions, plans, etc. (proxy)" What are advantages and disadvantages of loosely lumping together these largely undefined category-concepts?

(I will try to have an open-agenda here and lay out what (at least I think) my agenda is. The following open-agenda happens to fit right in with, and can be a template for, the part of the workflow-process of a project where you draw up, and coordinate decisions about, a group-agreed-upon-goal-means-methods-statement, a preliminary checklist that can guide discussion of what people agree to for a project.)

Goals (Agenda): goals-means-method statement / "we-can" statements: We can succeed. We can make things work. We can understand what is wrong. We can fix what is broken. We can use not-automatically-learned skills & not-automatically-transferred skills. We can use STEM to connect signals and reality. We can connect STEM, project-management, and ethics. We can use intersecting-interlocking-interconnecting areas. We can learn, coordinate, and solve problems. We can manage types of, and terms for, generalization. We can use "low-bar enlightenment." We can extend into or maintain a full range of motion, not only contraction(reducing/narrowing). We can participate to complete projects. We can learn from and correct the mistakes of the past. We can use and understand the effects of perception and abstraction. We can make and use tools and resources. We can use feedback, testability, measurability, & definability. We can use patterns, protocols, and processes for and with skills, abilities, and learning. We can communicate. We can make progress.

We can generalize; We can distinguish between, and use, types of (and terms for) generalization. We can generalize STEM. We can generalize participation. We can generalize projects (project-context). We can generalize decision-coordination (voting etc). We can generalize indirectly defined Value-Function-&-Meaning (non-collapse). We can generalize object-relationship-spaces. We can generalize categories of types of systems. We can generalize system-fitness and system-epidemiology. We can generalize data-hygiene, system hygiene. We can generalize system collapse. We can generalize system defense, system health, system-immune-systems, information-immune-systems, system information-epidemiology, and system-and-definition-membranes. We can generalize disinformation vs. definition-clarification. We can generalize Signal-Data Processing and/vs. Instruction Management. We can generalize System-Externalization, task/step derivation/integration, and task/process-modularity. ? We can generalize System-State management and schedules. ? We can generalize context.

We Can Use "Low-Bar Enlightenment": (Summary) We can use the idea of 'being trapped in potentially endless cycles of ~"rebirth" due to ~"ignorance" ' as a metaphor/analogy/simile/paradigmatic-model/example for repeated project-failures, where a lack of perception / understanding of the causes of project-failure is involved in self-perpetuating feedback cycles leading to such repeating failures (with invisible or misunderstood causes): The goal is ending cycles of being endlessly-'reborn' into mismanaged-projects that unnecessarily-fail in the same correctable, but uncorrected, ways over and over again. We can learn to perceive invisible (or previously unperceived and / or not-automatically-perceived) causes of failure and collapse ((definable, measurable, testable, falsifiable) project, system, definition failure and collapse), where this failure and collapse (this system-state of failure-collapse) can be the default state(s)/equilibrium(ia) that systems move and iterate towards. We can stop these cycles of failure by using information/data, perception, and learning.

Low-Bar Enlightenment (elements of):

The perception/understanding that repeating cycles of failed actions and projects can result from errors in perception and planning (a proverbial 'wheel of samsara').
The perception/understanding that indefinately-repeating cycles-of-failed actions and projects can exist without inevitable-automatic-learning arising from raw feedback of experiential data about that failure. I.e., learning (that is sufficient to prevent the problem in future) does not automatically result from experiencing mistakes or overall-system-shocks, etc. [Possibly related to ~'cultural/epiphenomena'-learning as an additional layer: Q: How are "internally"-invisible skills/abilities/patterns learned? A: "Externally"?]
The perception/understanding that perception/understanding can be fooled in principle and in practice.
The perception/understanding that learning-from-failures does not happen automatically, and can indefinitely not-happen.
The perception/understanding that learning-from-failures does not transfer automatically from one perceived-recognized-learned area to other areas, and can indefinitely not-transfer.
The perception/understanding that non-automatic-learning and invisible-problems are not solved by 'system shocks,' the use of violence, or arbitrary low level (basal) system changes (also see basal-distal disjunctions).
The perception/understanding that models of causality can be wrong in principle and in practice.
The perception/understanding that plans/goals can be incorrectly defined (so that plans are not followed or follow-able as defined, and goals are not achieved or achievable as defined).
The perception/understanding that each participant's set of the shared definitions of the goals-and-structure-of-a-project can/will erode, weather, corrode, contract, deform and collapse (by default) unless properly configured and continually and actively maintained and repaired. There is no static definition/perception/understanding equilibrium: Staying connected to reality requires constant fitness-training, data-hygiene, and upkeep. (Universality Question: specific biology[intelligence] vs. general[ai, etc]?)
The perception/understanding that there are different types of non-automatic learning.
The perception/understanding that low-bar-enlightenment-perception applies to and extends to all parts of and participants in a project (and connected-projects) including time, not just you (being) here now. (~system-empathy/~system-compassion)
Broad Accessibility: The perception/understanding that useful learning can occur without many other dependencies (and is therefore broadly, generally, accessible to participants).
That the relationship between data, perception, learning, decisions, actions, and coordination, is not always simple, linear, or automatic.