Main topics:
A requirements model is, in simplest terms, a set of labeled propositions: most of it is natural language text. If so, how can you reduce the odds of it being misunderstood? Natural language is vague, ambiguous, unclear, while systems/products/services we make to solve requirements tend to be well defined, at least when they’re made; hence…
A Definition Network, as its name says, is a network. In it, each node is a definition of a term, and each edge is directed from the term that depends on another: if the definition of term A mentions term B, then there is an edge from B to A, and it reads that A…
When you read a definition, which is more useful, to assume that it is rigid or that it can change, that there’s some plasticity? When you propose a definition, are you also intending it to stay as proposed, that is, to be rigid? Or, are you proposing it to help progress towards a better definition…
There is disagreement which leads to constructive revision of definitions (see Plastic Definitions and Define/Destroy method), i.e., the improvement of definitions during innovation, and then there is disagreement which is distracting, useless, wastes time, and takes focus and attention away from improvements. Distracting disagreement comes from ambiguity, synonymy, and vagueness, what I call linguistic causes…
”Why is it a problem to have stops? Stops are common. We should be able to add them to a live load.” He was insisting. This made no sense to me. ”You mean a shipment, right? The load becomes a shipment once matched.” I waited for his confirmation. It wasn’t happening. This got me thinking…
One of the observations made in the discussion of conceptual leaps is that new ideas rely on old. Even if new ideas mark discontinuity with old, they also built on old ideas. By old ideas, I mean ideas which are established, non-controversial for a given group of people working together (so they may be controversial…
In each iteration of the Define/Destroy method, definitions of terms are changed in order to reflect new ideas. At the beginning of an iteration, we may have a definition D1 of a term T, and at the end, we have D2. The reason we change D1 into D2 is to align the documented meaning of…
How can definitions make it easy to do some things, and hard to do others? How do they impose constraints on future choices? If you commit to a definition, meaning you choose one definition of a term over others, then you also take additional commitments. It is a case of getting more than you bargained…
A definition is a record of past decisions. This is a simple idea that’s interesting to unpack. Let’s take the example of the term “Service” that was redefined in another text. There, I took the common definition of “Service” from WordNet, which was the following: Service: work done by one person or group that benefits…
There are two ideas which cause trouble when thinking about definitions, and what a good definition may look like. The first toxic idea is that you can produce a definition which explains all meanings of a term, for everyone, anytime, and everywhere. It is the idea that you can make a successful universal definition. The…
When you try to define something, that thing – be it concrete or abstract, chairs or thoughts – is what your definition is about. If there is exactly one, unique such thing, your definition should, ideally, unequivocally identify it. If I were to learn that definition, I would know exactly what it is that you…
Belnap is less concerned than Kant with categories of definitions, than with the ”good” properties of definitions. For him, a definition tries to explain the meaning of a word or phrase. ”I consider [definitions] only in the sense of explanations of the meanings of words or other bits of language. (I use ’explanation’ as a…
For Kant, to define is to identify all primitive properties of that which you are trying to define, whereby that set of properties allows you, me, others, to unambiguously distinguish the thing from others. It is important that all these properties in the set, i.e., properties which together make up the definition, are primitive. Primitive…
The Define/Destroy method makes, destroys, rebuilds definitions. A definition is, in other words, the key thing that is made, changed, discarded when applying the method. These definitions are unstable by design, and this makes them very different from ones in glossaries of mature domains of knowledge. In Define/Destroy, a definition is temporary, whereas in, say,…
This text goes into the details of a single Define/Destroy iteration, in a project I was part of in 2017. I show how the Define/Destroy iteration was done, including the detail of the glossary built in the Define part of the iteration, and the glossary remade as a result of the Destroy part of that first iteration.
Define/Destroy consists of doing a specific set of activities iteratively. This short text outlines how each iteration looks, what it uses as its inputs, and what it produces as its output.
Innovation is iterative: start from an idea, find flaws, replace it with a better one, repeat. Each cycle destroys to rebuild. This is intentional constructive destruction; it isn’t Schumpeter’s creative destruction from systemic contradictions. Invent, destroy, repeat. If ideas are willingly exposed to, and revised in response to constructive criticism, then the more iterations, the…