🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct29.135623.11557@oracorp.com> daryl@oracorp.com (Daryl McCullough) writes:
>I will agree that *given* an abstraction function, and *given* a
>decomposition of a system into parts, then it may be possible to say,
>objectively, whether the system with that decomposition and that
>abstraction function has a certain functional organization.  However,
>the choice of abstraction function and decomposition are not
>objective, and can be done in more than one way.

It seems to me that when talk about a "system", rather than an "object",
there is already implicitly a functional organization specified.

I will agree that you can't talk about the functional organization of an
object without identifying it as a particular system.  I don't think there
are, at this point, any fundamental (i.e., philosophical) problems in doing
this for human beings as thinking entities, although the practical (i.e.,
scientific) problems are very considerable.