COHERENT DATA PROJECT FIRST, A NOTE: This portfolio of information concerning coherent data is made available by myself with the aim of acquiring additional circumspection and critical probity on the questions that underlie these types of highly significant systems. Specifically, it would be interesting to acquire interest in product design or new information organization, such as those employed at Apple, Microsoft, and Google. Although, calling them systems in their simplest form is a gesture of logic rather than an analogy to any formal system in math, physics, or social science. The aim is a sweeping one, even in its minor implications And many of the difficulties which ordinarily would arise with so ambitious a project are already less significant for the project than they would at first appear. The following are qualified selections from a variety of documents I intended to submit to the Ozy Genius Awards. However, I was never selected for the award, and the materials therefore never exchanged hands. They were not part of my official submission. Like the work discussed by Igor Schagaev, who is playing a casual mentorship role for me at Academia, its worth is likely to consist, in my account at least, of distinct logical tools. Whether they are new tools is a matter of opinion until real expert insiders grasp how effective they are, and if there is any limitation restricting the further development of these concepts into vertical or horizontal----or perhaps, universal would be a better word, information management or product creation. As the two things are becoming synonymous (it is the virtual age, after all), it may be recognized that it is a critical time in the history or post-history of coherent systemology which underlies its deployment. The hint I can give to the knowledge made possible by this structuritics, is simply that it concerns qualities used in a fair and balanced way. Like in philosophy, the inappropriate use of the logic is restricted by the validity of the assumptions adopted before parsing the logic. Now, for the main material: PART 1: THE PROJECT This project [the project] concerns logics I have been developing since 2013 or earlier that concerns data development, specifically knowledge-oriented AND / OR psychic data. I am a college undergraduate at Southern Connecticut State University, and have written books on subjects such as dimensional philosophy and psychology. I have some experience with object-oriented programming, which is a simplified form of programming developed by Michael Roberts. I have written very simple programs using object-oriented programming that demonstrate how to make categorical deductions, which is a new philosophical method for constructing objective knowledge. However, my plan is to use the grant money from the OZI GENIUS AWARDS to produce a more polished and professional product. The goal is to find a usefulness for philosophy outside of philosophy. Or, as a secondary goal, to produce a popular philosophy product. My evidence shows that the method is fair and balanced (too complicated to explain here), and that it produces knowledge statements which are useful in relating mathematical and experiential concepts with the world of abstractions. I also have a variety of secondary, ‘psychic’ methods, which could be bundled with the software as secondary tools. I can’t explain them here because they are not widely known). The money could be used to pay a student programmer to finish specific piecemeal goals in the overall project. The collective software could then be bundled as a package and marketed to a corporation. But there is the advice don’t put all your eggs in one basket… So the plan is to have a compound software that does more than one thing. Later, when I contact corporations, the individual parts of the package could be farmed out into a more detailed project, working with a larger budget. The ultimate applications of the software include: *Virtual reality interface organization. *Practical knowledge applications. *Knowledge organization. *Maybe even predicting quality-factors that affect the stock market. Some notes: 1. Applying some of the basic methods is easy. 2. The implications of the software concept are wide-ranging, as discussed above. 3. I am the originator of the philosophy method, so I have the best expertise relating to the method. I would be honored to receive support from corporate parties concerning the applications of my concept of data. Doubtless this requires significant collaborations, which could occur through an electronic medium. 2. INITIAL GUIDE TO DATA ANALYSIS AB:CD & AD:CB Vis. initial theme of progressive angles on data. GOALS Analogous to a line graph E.g. 1. A posteriori constructive (AB:CD) vs. 2. Deconstructive-post scriptive (AD:CB) *Refers to quadrants *More appropriate application to math than social science. *Favors objective objects in objective space. *Favors universal objects. *Views non-objective, non-universal objects in terms of objectivity and universals. *Via applicability to math, might apply to social science equations. *Major role is variablistic and metaphorical. 1. Find relation to qualia-data. E.g. such-and-such a factor is predicted to lead to obesity, or entropy, or free markets, etc. 2. Chart the opposite terms in the diagonally opposite quadrant. 3. Optional: chart the opposite data as an opposite equation measuring the absoluteness of the opposite term. 4. Construe what the two most likely, and also themselves mutually- opposite context categories are for the opposition. For example, obesity is opposed by high metabolism. It’s prospective context of comparison might be eating and exercise. Entropy is opposed by energy, and its context of comparison might be the physics of possibility and the physics of impossibility. Free markets are opposed by communism, and the context of comparison might be money and society, or control and sovereignty. 5. Calculate the significance of the terms coherently. Obese eating requires metabolic exercise. When the obese exercise, it metabolizes eating. Possible entropy physics is impossible energy physics. Impossible entropy physics is possible energy physics. A society of free markets implies money for communism. Money for free markets implies a communist society. Free market control implies communist sovereignty. Free market sovereignty implies controlling communism. 6. Each term in each formula can be used as a variable. Measuring the variable in any way can be plugged into the equation to yield results. These should usually be phrased as yes / no questions. For example, if a society is communist, we can conclude from the previous expressions (working backwards from the last one about communism and free markets): 1. Communism doesn’t need to be controlled. 2. There is no free market control, because communism is not sovereign. 3. There is some limit on money for free markets. 4. The money for communism could be used for something else. Voila, results, simply from the measurement of communism, and a few abstract relationships, which fit a coherent formula. 7. Perhaps it could be possible to chart the context categories in terms of the subject categories, but this leads to a higher data dependence. 8. Pick more data and create deductions, or combine multiple data sets using more complex methods. Such as: Set A: ABCD Set B: EFGH Combination: AGBH and AGFD and ECFD and ECBH (4 for 8, instead of 2 for 4: retains efficiency.) 3. PROPERTY ROLES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR DATA *Knowledge-oriented data. *Role for emotional facts. * “Absoluteness” / Qua absoluteness / Relative absoluteness, not absolute relativism. *Quick abstract information. *Deep data. *A role for the philosopher. Puts thinking ahead of mere technicalism. But does a L lot of the work for you. ‘Systems-hungry’. *Ways of organizing space and time, using depth concepts. *Makes bad theories look like the lowest common denominator. IMPLICATIONS FOR INVESTOR SOFTWARE *Can make practical predictions about influences, trends, etc. as shown earlier. *Subjective when there is no way to measure the data. Depends on data absoluteness. *For example, may make predictions based on the composition of the earth, or based on influential ideas. \ *Accepted on an ‘AS-IF’ basis. That is, it can’t prove the factors are influential, even if they should be. For example, we don’t know that being composed of carbon influences the stock market, unless we know that it influences something. Requires generalization. *Can be adapted to current knowledge of the stock market, with major gains in quality-oriented knowledge. *Cannot make stocks meaningful unless they are meaningful. But can provide additional significance for those that already find them meaningful. IMPLICATIONS FOR COMPUTER GAMES *Greater focus on the ‘meaning’ of the game. *Can cater to specific types of tastes. *Excellent for ‘genii’ type characters. *Can be used to design archetypes. *Allows for data immersion, not just game immersion. *No longer just about mathematicians and hackers. *Can create complex islands---or landscapes of usable data. *Data can be developed depending on usefulness. *’Ergot truth’. *Makes virtual reality seem less virtual, and more real. *Alternate systemic reality. *Psychological strategizing. *Potential optimization based on preferences. *Contributes to design functions, including user interfaces. *Can be programmed to work automatically with minimal input. *Seeker function for user interface objects. *Intellectualizes gameplay, or provides additional interest. 4. KNOWLEDGE CALCULATOR We can ask, ‘What in your opinion is the opposite of _______?’ The user can even add more than one opposite. Some of the functions can be left editable, so that the user can introduce whatever concept she or he chooses. When the question is race or gender, it can be pointed out that black people are not opposite of white people except in color, and black men do not always combine with white women (even though the system suggests that they do combine). The system says nothing about individual preferences. Individual people can be as weird as they want. Then the user cannot question the validity of the data. OMNISCIENT DATA One way to view the program, is that it offers a kind of ‘Omni-Science’ or omniscience. Although it takes some specialization to know exactly what is going to happen, and I leave that largely up to additional psychic methods, some of the observations are more objective and more definite than traditional Aristotelian syllogisms, which is a good benefit. Users can be encouraged to use words like ‘Universal’ ‘Specific’ ‘Arbitrary’ ‘Ambiguous’ ‘System’ ‘Incoherent’ ‘Infinity’ and ‘Zero’ to reach special results which are similar to absolute knowledge. Users should be cautioned that some of the results are more complex than merely saying that something is opposite, or it isn’t. A manual should show proofs I have previously written showing how the system is not a Kantian syllogism, a traditional analogy, Lewis Caroll’s categorical deduction, Avi Sion’s deduction, or a traditional use of the Cartesian Coordinates. The orientation of the new system is coherent, absolute, relative, and balanced. It uses properties like exclusivity, polarity, and analogy to reach conclusions that are relatively absolute, rather than absolutely relative. PSYCHIC METHODS One psychic method I learned from a T.V. psychic (he left it up the audience to figure out). It involves asking what is one someone’s mind, and then asking what else is important to them (these categories could be easily filled in hypothetically based on someone’s interests or recent online conversations). To get results, take the opposite of the second thing on the person’s mind with the first thing that was on their mind (with some abstraction), and you get an idea of what is most important to them at the time. Additional psychic methods can be found in a paper I wrote called “Forms of Psychic Prediction”. There may even be ways to combine these types of methods with categorical deduction or use them with user data to create predictions about the stock market, etc. The resulting software could be proprietary based on the concept that no one else has applied it in the same way. In common use, the first method (which is one of the later methods in the article) could be supplemented not only by inferences about preferences, but also by elaboration tools which could use ordinary deductions to reach for inferences about user data and informational relevance. For example, if someone is apparently concerned about meeting someone that rides a motorcycle, messages could be referred to them that say ‘don’t worry, this is just the type of place where you might meet somebody you know’. Or if someone is worried about being a poor artist, they can be referred to information about affordable art supplies, etc. Some of this utility is actually already underused. 5. AFFIRMING QUOTATIONS “Coherent knowledge is a metaphor for math”. “Coherent knowledge is at least 90 degrees different from math”. “Coherent knowledge involves the science of qualities”. “Coherent knowledge is both simple and complex. In fact, it even deals with those concepts, and their logical interrelation”. “Coherent knowledge opens a window to a new world of meta-properties”. “Without coherent knowledge such as categorical deduction, the coherent project is reduced to an endless succession of substitutes”. “Where it is bold, it may also be wise. Where it is simplistic, where there method is correct, all that is required is elaboration”. “Coherent knowledge begins with a visual metaphor, and moves into a world of exceptional conditionalities. However, at the base level, no category is anything less than ¼ of all data”. “Coherent data is both exponential and efficient”. 6. MAJOR ADDITIONAL CONSUMER CONCEPTS MEANINGFUL INTERFACE 1.0 *Interfacing between user preferences and abstract categorical deduction data yields a concept of a meaningful interface. *Textual foundations can be used to make visual and cinematic decisions. *Cinematic decisions can be used to guide gameplay and determine game / narrative structure. *Visual choices made by textual interface can be interactive, leading to a self-reference loop. ARTWORK FOR MEANINGFUL INTERFACE *Specific types of artwork, such as abstract urban landscapes and Escher knots, as exemplified by my own artwork called Hyper-Cubism, can be used to create a meaningful, paradoxical feel. *Visual logic provides a correspondence between abstract data and UI controls. *Generalized parsing can be developed to discover by trial and error the landscapes that seem most interesting, and thus, the most meaningful. *Intellectual, minimalist, archetypal, and modular landscapes can be found, each with its own brand of symbolism. *Controls should be kept highly visualistic and uninhibited. *As a rule, every new symbol should become standardized to mean something. Old symbols can be swapped for new ones if the new ones seem more meaningful. *Art, natural symbols, M.C. Escher, architectural elements, and categorical logic provide a standard for symbolism. The library can be expanded as necessary, but with some risk. Top-down aesthetic should not be spread thin. When in doubt, systematize. METAPHYSICAL INTERFACE *Categorical ideas like modularity, linear development, scale, hyperbolics, exclusivity, polarity, and analogy, essence / quality, quantity, and coherence can be used as higher level organizations for the visual and interface system, creating a concept of depth and complexity. *Simple controls should allow easy access to profound but not easily exhausted, yet meaningful functions. *In a view of a gaming general interface, concepts like metaphysical map, inventory, scenario design, unique items, preference-based / variablistic content, and the uniquely designed experience root the user in a platform in which there is endless variety of desirable objectives, visuals, and functions. *Ideally, the platform would have a wide variety of selectable / ‘designer’ preferences, including simplicity versus complexity, technicalism versus tutorial, selectable key interests, special blocking of content, and special aesthetic preferences, suiting this interface both to general UI, and to virtual reality games. 7. PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT IS BASED ON SOME PRE-EXISTING CONCEPTS: *The Inference Engine (Source unknown?) *Kantian Universalism. *Standard Analogies. *Venn Diagrams. *Aristotelian Syllogisms. *Avi Sion‘s categorical deduction (which was not well-elaborated by him). *Modal Realism, a metaphysical theory based on “Many Worlds”. *Object-Oriented Programming. *Application of Aesthetics to Logic, as suggested by Wittgenstein. CONCEPTS I HAVE DEVELOPED IN MY OWN WORK INCLUDE: *A categorical deduction method more advanced and coherent than Avi Sion’s. *The Paroxysm: A solution to all paradoxes. *Psychic methods derived from interpreting a TV psychic and making some elaborate deductions. *Extended methodology for categorical deduction. IDEAS I THOUGHT OF SINCE THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT *Popular User Interface Designed for the Purpose of Having Meaning. *Interactive Art Parsing with Preferences. *Meaning-Oriented Politics. *My philosophy is “over-unity”. MORE RECENT IDEAS *Visual parsing using symbols to construct complex pictures, and recursively interpreting pictures for hidden data. *Evolution as the evolution of values, based on the concept that humanity doesn’t desire brute survival. *Objective knowledge as an evolution of math, posing some advantages for coherency. *The concept of the materialism of ideas. 8. NOTATION ABOUT UNCONVENTIONAL USES UNCONVENTIONAL OPPOSITES Arbitration / Arbitrariness Ambiguity / Ambiguation Arbitration involves clear judgment, ambiguity involves confusion. Coherency / Coherence Correspondent / Correspondence Coherence and correspondence theories are traditional opponents in philosophy. Buddhism / Buddhist Aporetic / Aporia Aporia is about finding something, Buddhism is about finding nothing. Communism Capitalism Political distinctions make for arbitrary choices. However, the two are economic opposites. Note: Remember, new opposites can be used as they are discovered. And opposition does not imply conflict in this system, only an opposite functionality. There is no set order implied in this system, so it is legitimate to give any view emphasis over another, although it does not change the data. For example, arbitrary communists are ambiguous about capitalism is similar to ambiguous capitalists are arbitrary about communism. The difference is perspective. And other combinations are implied depending on the perspective, which are also different in perspective alone, and comparable coherently. Essentially, a different perspective is a different choice about which data is being analyzed. Thus, there is no conflict. It can be recognized that one of the assumptions is that one or another category has been given emphasis. But so long as all opposites remain identical for each word, then so too, the available context categories are identical for both terms in the opposite comparison, since opposites remained paired, and pairs are not attached except when adopting a larger system. Larger systems assume greater organization, which is similar to the first-category choice. 9. DATA-STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Set 1 [Does the term have an opposite? If so, locate it. *Apply the two terms as a binary set located diagonally opposite. If not, does the data represent a quality. *Find the state of the property. *Locate the opposite state.] Set 2 [For all opposite binary sets. *There is data equivalence. *Data equivalence means Boolean operators can be used. *Opposite terms are coherent, if 0 is excluded. (In practice, 0 is actually not excluded from the data, because it has an opposite. This simply suggests that data is ‘over-unity’). ] Set 3 [Data comparison occurs in such a way that opposites are not compared. In every item in a set, data is not repeated. Neutral categories are allowed to exchange places at every set level. Both subject and context categories relate to their opposites in opposite positions. Therefore, the data is efficient. Because the data is exclusive, it is coherent.] Set 4 [Correspondences between opposites may occur in ratios. *A small amount of one category implies a larger amount or potential for its opposite. Every comparison matters. *The system may be seen as neutral or positive. *Overlapping relations can create complex rules. 1. The rule of relating to an opposite context. E.g. The context of free-will is the opposite of the context of determinism. 2. The rule of relating to an opposite context in an opposite way. E.g. The context of free-will is free-willed in the same way that the context of determinism is determined. 3. The rule of contrasting paradigms E.g. communist control inspires capitalist anarchy. Communist anarchy also inspires capitalist control. *The system is non-contradictory, but is defined by the properties of its states. *The application may differ greatly with different world conditions, emphases, etc.] Set 5 [ The set may iterate in the sense that there may be other similar sets, or translations of the set. *The simplest iteration occurs on the set level between neighboring categories. *The same may occur in sub-sets, which relate to opposite subsets. *More complex iterations involve multiple sets. In the strict philosophical application, iteration involves finding an analogue for each category. *One method is to find multiple opposites or opposite concepts for each category. Typically this occurs through assuming that the context is an application, which relieves the system of finding multiple strict opposites. One coherent application may yield a full set of ‘applied’ opposites. For example, determinism might relate to writing as an equal category, but it implies the new set beginning with writing relates to writing and its context and opposite. Effort might be made to find applications which are comparable on both sides of the set, creating difficulty. *Another method is to relate apparently unrelated sets for coincidental relations. In this case, objects should not be repeated, so that the categorical relationships carry through. However, there is a greater requirement for linear-recursive construction of the set than in quadra comparisons. Set 6 Finding Exceptions [ Exceptions may occur simply through the combination of categories occupying identical positions in each set, producing results which may or may not be paradoxical. Typically exceptions are eliminated by considering only opposite comparisons, and relating opposites in opposites positions. However, this does not exclude some degree of complexity which could occur through the mergence of categories which already exist in the set. ] 10. IMPROVED WALL ST. PREDICTOR 1 [Take a variable such as ‘money’, ‘risk’, ‘liberty’, ‘complexity’, etc. And find its appropriate opposite within the context of the problem. ] 2 [Consider what the appropriate context of the problem is. If you don’t know, guess. *For example, if the subject is wealth and poverty, The context might be joblessness vs. innovation. *If the context is liquidity vs. capital reserves, The context might be risky investments vs. financial strategy ] 3 [Conduct Nathan Coppedge’s coherent categorical deduction on the subject and context. *List the target variable first and its opposite third. *If the context incorporates a strategic goal which seems more important than the key variable, then list the strategic goal first. For example, if job creation seems more important than the question of wealth, then try listing innovation first. Note: this changes the order of the other categories. Opposites are always in opposite positions, but the other elements exchange places. Examples: Innovative wealth involves joblessness for the poor. Innovative poverty involves joblessness for the wealthy. (Unless innovation is not the opposite of joblessness) Financial strategy involves capital reserves so that risky investments are liquid. Financial strategy involves liquidity so that risky investments are capital reserves. (Unless financial strategy is risky investment, or capital reserves are completely liquid) ] 4 [Now, test a variable involved in the analysis. Testing the variable should result in a context of relationships, like the following: A. Finances need a strategy (test), or investments need to be risky (test), or there is reserve capital (test), or the issue is liquidity (test) B. Find the opposing principle for financial strategy, such as risky investments. Find the opposing principle for capital reserves, such as liquidity C. Optional: introduce a genius strategy for an alternate opposite, implying alternate deductions. D. Now from (B), we know that if the principles are completely opposed, they are also opposed about their context. So there is a question of 1. Is it opposed, or instead universal? If money is universal, for example, we can say that money strategies oppose money risk, etc., even when both involve money. Then a more reasonable opposite is money strategy versus poverty risk, or money risk versus poverty strategy. These can in turn affect the deductions. 2. Is its context one particular context versus another? Then it might imply one instead of two deductions. 3. Does the combination of subject and context imply a particular strategy? Then one or another of the two deduction might be preferable to another, or both might be useful. ] 5 [ Analyze a particular stock. Is it risk adverse? Consider the deduction: *Liquid risk market control, Liquid control market risk Then it might imply a move involving liquid capital. If a stock is risky, it might suggest bolstering the market. Consider the deduction: *Jobless liquidity, employment capital Jobless capital, employment liquidity If there are no jobs, it might suggest jobs are liquid. Or, it might suggest that jobs involve capital. Remember that these deductions are not necessarily unique. There may be many other cases that also relate to each subject set. ] 11. EXAMPLES FROM “HOW TO WRITE APHORISMS” WITH LARGER DATA SETS, IGNORING DEDUCTIONS. These eight-part sets may be considered exhaustive so far as they are recursive. On the following pages, I make use of only the second set to expand another initial larger set, also found in that book. Eight-part sets are convenient for turning a six-part set into a 128-part set. If the two initial sets were contiguous, forming a combined recursive relationship of all-opposite (that is, equal, and related) parts, then that would be sufficient to create a fully 256-category set, which is one of the largest I have ever considered. Given the quality of the data in the set (organization wise, or for its applicability to categorical deductions) that is significant. [1] Cause, [2] Connection, [3] Effect, [4] Disconnection [5] Creation, [6] Construction, [7] Judgment, [8] Perfection [1] Mystery, [2] Origin, [3] Evidence, [4] Proof [5] Resolution, [6] Exception, [7] Opportunity, [8] Determination [1.1] The definition of meaning The mystery of meaning The origin of meaning The evidence of meaning The proof of meaning The resolution of meaning The meaningful exception The meaningful opportunity The meaningful determination [1.2] Practical applications Mysterious practical applications Beginning with practical applications Evidence from practical applications Proof from practical applications The resolution of practical applications Exceptional practical applications Opportunistic practical applications How to determine practical applications [1.3] Varieties of truth The mysterious variety of truth. The origin of variety in truth. Evidence of truth in variety. Proof of truth and variety. Resolution of varieties of truths. Exceptional variations of truth. Opportune varieties of truth. Determining varieties of truth. [1.4] The Way to Immortality The mysterious Immortal Way. The origin of the Way. Evidence on the path of the Way. The Way of Immortal Proof. The Way of Immortal Resolution. The Way of Immortal Exception. The Way of Immortal Opportunity. The Way of Immortal Determination. [2.1] Applying self-nature Mysterious applications to self-nature. The origin of selfish applications. Applying evidence of self-nature. Applying proof of self-nature. Resolving applications of self-nature. Exceptional applications of self-nature. Opportune applications of self-nature. Applied determinations of self-nature. [2.2] Practical variation Mysterious practice of variation. Original practice of variation. Practicing experiences of variation. Practical variations of proof. Resolving practical variations. Finding exceptions to practice and variation. Opportune practices and variations. Ultimate determination of variative practices. [2.3] The Way of the World The mystery of the World’s Way. The origin of the Way of the World. The evidence of the Way in the World. The way to prove the World’s Way. The Way that resolves the World. The exceptional Way of the World. Opportunities for the Way in the World. Determining one’s way in the World. [2.4] Self-Identification Mysterious self-identity The origin of identifying the self. Evidence of self-identity. Identifying self-proof. Identifying self-resolution. Identifying self-exceptions. Identifying opportunities for oneself. Self-determined identification. [3.1] Varieties of meaning Mysterious varieties of meaning. The origin of varieties of meaning. Evidence for variety in meaning. Varieties of meaningful proof. Resolving varieties of meaning. Exceptional varieties of meaning. Opportune meaningful variation. Determining meaningful varieties. [3.2] Practical roles Mysterious practice of roleplay. The origin of roleplay. Evidence of the practicality of roles. Proof of roles in practice. Resolving practical roles. Practical role exceptions. Opportunities for roleplay. Practically-determined roles. [3.3] The nature of the world Mysterious Nature in the world. The origin of Nature in the world. Evidence of the Natural World. Proof of the World’s Nature. The Natural Resolution of the World. Natural exceptions in the world. The World’s opportunity with Nature. Determining the nature of the World. [3.4] The Healthiest Way The mystery of the Way of Health. The Origin of the Healthy Way. Evidence for the Ways of Health. Proof of Health along the Way. Healthier-way solutions. Healthier-way exceptions. Opportunities for healthier ways. Determining the Healthiest Way. [4.1] Forms of meaning The mysterious Form of Meaning. Forms of origin for meaning. Forms of evidence for meaning. Forms of proof for meaning. Forms of meaningful solutions. Forms of exceptional meaning. Forms of meaningful opportunities. Forms of determining meaning. [4.2] Practical Example The mystery of practicing examples. The origin of examples in practice. Practicing exemplary evidence Practicing proof examples. Practicing solution examples. Practicing exceptional examples. Opportunities to practice example. Determining practical examples. [4.3] Serendipity Mysterious serendipity. The origin of Serendipity. Evidence of Serendipity. Serendipitous reality. Serendipitous truth. Exceptions to serendipity. Serendipitous opportunism. Determining serendipity. [4.4] Different Character A mysteriously different character. The origin of another character. Evidence of the character of difference. Proof of different characters. Resolving character differences. Characters with different exceptions. Opportunities for character differences. Determining another character. 12. User-Accessibility and Graphics Ideas Requirements: 1. Photo-labeling software 2. List of all opposites in the English language organized by individual word pairs. 3. Way of integrating list of opposites with photo-labeling software. My idea: 1. Photos can be selected based on words, preferences, or preferred photos, etc. 2. Photos are organized diagonally opposite when opposite. AB-CD, AD-CB. 3. The photos tell a meaningful story, in which there are two options for every four categories. (Synonymous categories will be preference-selected, rather than permutative). 4. The story can be organized by opposite keywords. 5. The keywords determine how the story is told in language. 6. The photos determine the visual variables of the story. 7. The overall story is just a snapshot of a meaningful moment. 8. Meaningful moments are collectible. Additional requirements: 1. Essentially, what is needed is an assumption that the photo says what the words say. 2. This can be done by developing criteria for what constitutes each word. 3. Or, users can rate photos based on word descriptions. 4. Or, previously-rated content can be used. 13. TYPOLOGY = LESS FLOODLE More information about the potential of interface typology: RE: "The Future of Web Design is Hidden in the History of Architecture..." https://medium.com/@sall/the-future-of-web-design-is-hidden-in-the-history-of-architecture-1cc93ea854d0 Excellent article! Genius typology! I can see how we are currently in the renaissance period, according to your descriptions. I have been trying to predict the future myself, and I think there are hints in the concept of preferences and corresponding symbolic objects. We need more ‘deep structure’ and less ‘floodle’! That means abandoning the idea that its all appearances, and embracing the idea that there is inherent gamification content. And making things appeal to the sensory mindset, as well as the symbolic / conceptual mind-set. It means more perfection, more taken-for-granted, and more visual metaphor. 1. Opportunity for streamlining amongst pre-determined categories. 2. Design for user-preferences. 3. Structural logic components. 4. Ability to accept user-paradigms like evolution, emotionalism, etc. RELATED SOURCES Coppedge, Nathan. ------. Coherent Logic. CIP, 2015. ------. Coherent Systems Theory. CIP, 2015. -------. The Dimensional Philosopher’s Toolkit. CIP, 2013, 2015. ------. “Interface Euphoria.” Electronic: hypercubics.blogspot.com -------. The PMG Guide to Interface Design. CIP, 2014. [-----. Assorted Draft Articles. Academia.edu.] Raymond, Eric S. The Cathedral & the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source. O’Reilly Media, 2001. Nathan Coppedge, / SCSU 11/29/2015, p.