2013

Abstract: View-point oriented manipulation of concepts can be helpful for generating new ideas in basic sciences and in the meantime, justifying the processes that are principally meaningful to the related disciplines. Mathematics, as a major ground for basic sciences, seems to be an appropriate exemplar to show how such a claim can be valid. The processes that are particularly attractive in case of mathematics are the projections from one space onto another, the transformations from one formalism into another and finally the critiques that are made to show how far two formalisms can be mutually consistent. In this paper, having reviewed the principles of view-point oriented manipulation, mathematical processes will then be discussed in this regard and an example will be presented showing the way it works for transforming a formalism into a new one.

Theoretical Computer Science, 2000

We argue that the impact of formalisms would much beneÿt from adopting the habit of systematically and carefully relating formalisms to methods and to the engineering context, at various levels of granularity. Consequently, we oppose the attitude of con ating formalism and method, with the inevitable consequence of emphasizing the formalism or even just neglecting the methodological aspects. To make our re ections more concrete we illustrate our viewpoint addressing one particular activity within the software development process, namely the use of formal speciÿcation techniques. To qualify the essential ingredients of a formal method for speciÿcation, we propose a pattern covering the formal and the methodological aspects and also their mutual relationships. Our pattern includes some novel concepts such as the relationship between end-products and formal models, which allows to relate in a rigorous way di erent methods, outlining the concept of compositionality and of simulation of methods.

Academy of Management Review, 2009

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

Teaching Philosophy, 2020

This book offers an unprecedented resource for instructors. There have been many introductions to particular areas of formal philosophy, especially formal epistemology. However, this edited volume provides the first broad and accessible propaedeutic to almost all of the major applications of formal tools to philosophical questions.

Kafkas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi

Many opinions have been discussed about the place of literature in society so far. The overwhelming majority is of the opinion that literature is a mirror of society. On the other hand, Formalism, as a literary theory, argues that the purpose of literature is literariness. Therefore, it is accepted as a rebellion against the understanding of literature dating back to the 1900s. Instead, it is suggested that a literary work should be studied as text-oriented. Furthermore, Formalists argue that the language of the work should be examined in terms of its literary elements, that is intrinsic, rather than extrinsic. That is the reason why they are criticized by other literary critics focusing on biographical, sociological, psychological, religious or historical issues. Their approach draws on those of Ferdinand de Saussure. Combining the views of many theorists, they make text-oriented literary studies. Formalism is often confused with official or legal correspondence. The reason why for...

2019

Knowledge and Computing (Delegates and other contributors) "Knowledge is created from a subjective combination of different attainments as there are intuition, experience, information, education, decision, power of persuasion and so on, which are selected, compared and balanced against each other, which are transformed, interpreted, and used in reasoning, also to infer further knowledge. Therefore, not all the knowledge can be explicitly formalised. Knowledge and content are multi-and inter-disciplinary long-term targets and values. In practice, powerful and secure information technology can support knowledge-based works and values." "Computing means methodologies, technological means, and devices applicable for universal automatic manipulation and processing of data and information. Computing is a practical tool and has well defined purposes and goals."

‘Formalism’ and its derivative ‘formalist’ (as noun or adjective) remain potent derogatory terms within architectural discourse. It is taken for granted that the creative investment into the elaboration of forms detracts from the concern for function. A moment’s reflection reveals that all concern for a design’s functioning must be achieved by working on its form. My formula for this truism: Form delivers Function. My comprehensive theory of architecture – the theory of architectural autopoiesis – identifies the distinction of form and function as the lead distinction of architecture, whereby form is the discipline’s internal reference, i.e. our immediate responsibility, and function is the discipline’s external reference, i.e. our ultimate responsibility to society mediated via our production of forms. My theory further emphasizes that the functionality designers (in constrast to engineers) should be concerned with is social (rather than technical) functionality. In most general terms the societal function of architecture and the design disciplines is the spatio-morphological ordering and framing of all social interaction processes.

Pengertian formalism dan strukturalism

Footprint No. 22, pp. 89-102, 2018

https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.12.1.1760 Emmanuel Petit recently invoked the work of Colin Rowe to render a discussion of architectural precedent relevant for the digital age. Questioning Petit’s approach, this article explores the implications latent in this invocation. In so doing, it highlights their misalignments with the current concerns of digital design practitioners. The article thus focuses on the question of a possible after-life of Rowe’s formalism for the digital age. It starts by charting its genealogical development from Rudolf Wittkower’s humanist grids to Peter Eisenman’s ‘post-functionalist’ pursuits of autonomous form and Greg Lynn’s ‘pliant’ geometries. This showcases the dual historical effect of Rowe’s analytical formalism. From the late 1940s to the present, his disciples employed it both as a historiographical model and as a generative mechanism for architectural design. The history of Rowe’s formalism is therefore intertwined with the contemporary concerns of digital design practitioners, including Petit’s question of theorising precedent. The digital design practitioners’ assertions of autonomy are historically rooted in Rowe’s analytical formalism. In the final instance, Rowe’s analysis was carried out from the perspective of modernist humanism, and this historically remained the case in its various versions from Wittkower to Eisenman. Updating Rowe, as Petit suggested, would therefore only perpetuate a modernist outlook in a postmodern age. A formalism for the present cannot ignore the enduring points of the postmodern critique that preceded it. In conclusion, a contemporary variant of formalism needs to address the debates around its possible synthesis with contextualist concerns. To do so, it also needs to engage with the poststructuralist critiques of the intervening decades. Some examples from recent literature exemplify such an approach. They could therefore serve as useful precedents towards an integrated formalism for the present.

2018

This special issue consists of papers deriving from some of the presentations at the conference "The Emergence of Structuralism and Formalism" held at Catholic Theological Faculty, Charles University, in June 2016. The conference brought together over 30 academics from Europe and North America. The conference presentations varied from historical discussions to new philosophical developments with respect both to Structuralism and Formalism. This volume contains 9 papers that represent a cross-section of these presentations. We begin, appropriate to the location of the conference, with a survey of the history of Czech logic. We follow with two papers that open their discussions from the perspective of the historical development of Formalism and Structuralism, and then with two critiques of formalist and structuralist views in the light of the history of mathematics. We continue with two, more speculative, discussions of Formalism and finally two of Structuralism. This volume reflects the diversity of the presentations at the original conference: some were technical, some historical and some more philosophical. What this volume cannot reflect, was the lively and scholarly interactions between the academics who attended, either as presenters or only as participants. However, we hope that such discussions will continue, and the subjects of Formalism and Structuralism remain as active fields of research as was exemplified in the conference. We thank the Czech grant agency (GACR 18-05838S) for supporting us during the production of this volume.