The attention of this post now turns to coherence as it appears in Maturana's work, and to expanding on the initial definition provided above. Between ordered systems and chaotic systems, are complex self-organizing systems that exhibit coherence in the form of structures and the patterns they form (Morin, 2023 Waldrop, 1992 Wheatley & Kellner-Rogers, 1996). The inverse of a coherent system is a chaotic system, where there is no consistency or logical pattern to its behavior over any immediately practical time frame, though both consistency and logic may appear over longer durations (Waldrop, 1992 Wheatley, 2006). The definition of coherence now reads "the quality of forming a logical and consistent system." A system may exist, but to be coherent it must be logical and consistent. The first is "the quality of being logical and consistent." The second is "the quality of forming a unified whole." Joined together, coherence might be defined as "the forming of a whole that is logical and consistent." Expanding further, the "whole" in the definition could refer to an integrated whole, a "system." The system could be one of logic, information, or data an organization or a community a group of humans, insects, or animals a government, and so on. CoherenceĪ Google search yields two definitions for the word coherence. Part 2 will then discuss coherence within the context of self-organizing incident operations. Part 1 will explore Maturana's use of the term coherence and arrive at an understanding of what the term means. It took on even greater meaning as I came across coherence in the writings of biologist-turned-philosopher Humberto Maturana, most notably in his later works. Coherence first became significant to me when I encountered it in Cynefin videos and blog posts. In particular, I find myself wondering about the coherence of self-organizing systems responding to incidents. On the contrary, coherence is relevant because of its dependence upon each individual's content and formal schemata.I am interested in what it means for something to be coherent. It can thus be assumed that a text is not always one because the existence of coherence is not always a given. In other words, they are mental frameworks for the organization of information about the world. Schemata, subsequently distinguished into Formal and Content Schemata (in the field of TESOL ) are the ways in which the world is organized in our minds. Bartlett in 1932 which creates further implications for the notion of a "text". "Continuity of senses" implies a link between cohesion and the theory of Schemata initially proposed by F. But within this textual world the arguments also have to be connected logically so that the reader/hearer can produce coherence. Thereby a textual world is created that does not have to comply to the real world. Dressler define coherence as a "continuity of senses" and "the mutual access and relevance within a configuration of concepts and relations". It has been stated that a text coheres only if the world around is also coherent. However, those text-based features which provide cohesion in a text do not necessarily help achieve coherence, that is, they do not always contribute to the meaningfulness of a text, be it written or spoken. The purely linguistic elements that make a text coherent are subsumed under the term cohesion. Coherence is achieved through syntactical features such as the use of deictic, anaphoric and cataphoric elements or a logical tense structure, as well as presuppositions and implications connected to general world knowledge. It is especially dealt with in text linguistics. ( February 2021) ( Learn how and when to remove this template message)Ĭoherence in linguistics is what makes a text semantically meaningful. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. The reason given is: reasoned, academic style. This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |