Gabecoyle.net
Informatic Model 2019 Reposting with Findings
| Interactive Methods |
Summary:
- Source: Gabecoyle.net, Critical Discourse Corpus
- Format: Book
- Introductory Notes: Cautionaries
- Search Term(s): N/A
- Frame: Principal Component Analysis
- Analytics: Frequency, Unsupervised, and Supervised
- Networks: Menu, Dynamic, Highlight, Static, Dispersion, & Electric Edge
- Layers: Hierarchical, Circular, Sugiyama
- Directionality: none selected
- Detailing: none
- Archive: Backup
- Informatic Authorship: Gabriel R. Coyle
|
| Informatic Trace: |
- Primary Association [Major to Intermediate Nodes, Highest-Level to Lowest Level]
- Rational Design
- Auxillary Nodes to Primary
- Initiate Justification
- Successive Majors to Primary Association
- Agency Design
- American Design
- Authority Design
- Secondary Association [Major to Intermediate Nodes Insular to Primary's Highest or Lowest Level]
- People Emotive
- Colonial Performances
- Power Design
- Tertiary Association [Major to Intermediate Nodes Insular to Primary Levels]
- Western Language
- Language Performance
- Performance Process
|
| Significance: |
Questioning the way in which these levels of association relate, and why there is insularity for specific associations is important. This allows a mind to sift through the nonsense and get to the heart of matters, as in this analysis, one isn't being presented information, but rather a model is given on how the presentation of knowledge is being constructed. A better insight into the intent of this construct can be discerned.
|
| Example Questions: |
Node Specific:
- How do power and authority differ? [Between levels shared node: Design, includes considering how American, Agency, and Rational relate to power]
- How does process and colonial relate to each other? How does language and colonial relate to each other [Between levels associated node: Performance - Performances]
- Why is the primary association a priority over the secondary and tertiary association?
- Select Distinguishing node(s) e.g. Authority, and look up entity actor node (e.g. people, trump, house, etc...priority attributed to actors)
- In what way is the priority being established? Pragmatic Consideration and/or Theoretical Consideration?
- What are the actor's actions? Are these specific (proper nouns) or general actors? If there is an actionable major/intermediary node, how do these actions prioritize a theoretical allegiance? If no specific actors, why is the author prioritizing this theoretical allegiance? That is, why is this the primary association, if no specific actors are present?
- And in this particular writing that is the point, there are no specific actors, but rather, general actors, so the writing has more to do with me, than the topic. So why this priority, this theoretical allegiance of authority, of rationality. Because I was raised by the American System, for and by people, that is the actor in consideration, people, across the board, an equality concept, of an authority, not simply of power.
- If I were not the author, I would simply speculate on why the theory is the priority, but ultimately, would only know that is the priority for the author.
- What is the purpose of the priority? (Top-Down, Bottom-Up)
- Bottom-up purpose: Emphasis on critical-rational purpose (of authority). To know who one is, informatically; not simply of a top-down doctrine, or some anecdotal profession, but rather of the actual design. To address and successes that fail and the failures the succeed. The degrees were the successes failure, but informatics modeling seems to stem from these failures that succeed...
Note the questions derive from design, not the anecdote of interest. Method listed in brackets.
|
