1. What all this is about
Relational structures like (simple) are quite ‘friendly’ and easy to ‘handle’ in any way. However, if structures become more ‘nasty’ as in (hard), one must think of ways to make them understandable and easier to deal with. The world is full of structures like (hard), in the professional world, like software architecture or business analysis, as well as in our thinking and communication in everyday life.
So, in order to analyze this encounter of the structures of thinking and the structures of the world, one can break it down to elementary relational structures and basic concepts, like for example, Component or Module in Graph Theory, or the concept of Concept in Formal Concept Analysis.
Obviously, there is much abstraction and modeling involved here. However, here we do not care too much about the precise definition of these concepts. The main focus is on mapping practically relevant situations to rigorous formal concepts, where the situations are based on practitioners’ experiences and the formal concepts are provided by mathematical theories.
Notice, that here we restrict ourselves to discrete relational structures and thus exclude functional structures, just in order to stay focussed.
2. On Modelling Theory
The core of Modeling is abstraction, a natural thing we do every day many million times. However, why do so many people think of modeling (in Software Engineering) as sth very heavy weight instead? (Like UML, MDE, …)
I’m trying to gain a deeper understanding of the structure of modeling and become aware of what’s going during abstraction.
This is quite close to, but explicitly different from, Logical Model Theory, Software Language Engineering, Cognitive Science and Epistemology. However, I’m not sure yet how Modelling Theory relates to Model Thinking (by Scott E. Page) or Computational Thinking (by Jeannette M. Wing).
3. About the author
A-Academic and In-Industrial. Not Model Theory. Not Model-based … . Not developing new theorems. No practical experiments, surveys or projects. Rigorous and relevant – as far as capable. Hermeneutical, Dialectical and Analytical – as appropriate.