156
Engineering Systems Integration
Overall, the framework of integration is the coalescence of managed activities (to produce a product or service) and the uses (of that product or service).
The managed activities portray the mechanisms of integration while the
uses capture how the integrated whole is capable of acting.
We observe the results of integration as evidenced by our own thoughts.
Thinking is an integral whole of conscious statements, intellectual and physical contexts, critical comparisons and evaluations, analytical and abstract
processes, and individual acts of recall. Our thoughts sometimes cause us to
engage in various behaviors that are sometimes describable as either acts or
activities (i.e., a sequence of acts that have contextual relevance). For reference, a process is a set of activities that are associated with a particular objective. The outcome of an act, activity, or process is a representation or model
of either the cognitive experience or the behavioral experience. The representation of the cognitive experience is behavior, and the representation of the
behavior(s) is something written, spoken, or built.
Integrative Mechanisms
The mechanisms of integration are a universal “cement.” The mechanisms of
integration construct, bind, and instigate (or allow for) change in the natural
and social world. The results of integration are both summative and formative—at once being both. Integrations build on previous integrations while
simultaneously forging new arrangements of coalescent parts. Integration
drives the studies of every discipline and field, permeates our thinking about
theory, and guides our research. It seems that it is part of nature’s work to
provide for interaction and integration. The animal kingdom endeavors to
build structures (humans build artifacts) and integrate structures (or artifacts) into systems.
We distinguish between those objects that merely interact, leaving no lasting change on one or the other object, with that of a dependency in which one
object relies on the other for sustainment. It would seem a safe presumption
that the essence of integration lies somewhere in the realm of the discussion
on causality. There is academic support for structural realism (also termed
neorealism) and object. But it is insufficient to begin the discussion of integration with causality. While causality is causal, it is not the root of causality. So,
while David Hume has positioned causality as the “cement of the universe,”
unfortunately, causality is a concept with which we have continued to struggle. However, a somewhat satisfying explanation for integration can be
gleaned from a discussion on mechanisms. The relations between causality
and mechanism are often obscured and tortured by confounding symptoms
of causal factors. We sometimes find it satisfying to think in terms of mechanisms. A mechanistic view invokes a sensibility about the relation between
cause and effect. Mechanisms, depending on the philosophical bent, help
determine your view of reality; issues of stability can be thought of as driven
by mechanisms. A mechanism can be thought of as resulting from a process
Engineering Systems Integration
Overall, the framework of integration is the coalescence of managed activities (to produce a product or service) and the uses (of that product or service).
The managed activities portray the mechanisms of integration while the
uses capture how the integrated whole is capable of acting.
We observe the results of integration as evidenced by our own thoughts.
Thinking is an integral whole of conscious statements, intellectual and physical contexts, critical comparisons and evaluations, analytical and abstract
processes, and individual acts of recall. Our thoughts sometimes cause us to
engage in various behaviors that are sometimes describable as either acts or
activities (i.e., a sequence of acts that have contextual relevance). For reference, a process is a set of activities that are associated with a particular objective. The outcome of an act, activity, or process is a representation or model
of either the cognitive experience or the behavioral experience. The representation of the cognitive experience is behavior, and the representation of the
behavior(s) is something written, spoken, or built.
Integrative Mechanisms
The mechanisms of integration are a universal “cement.” The mechanisms of
integration construct, bind, and instigate (or allow for) change in the natural
and social world. The results of integration are both summative and formative—at once being both. Integrations build on previous integrations while
simultaneously forging new arrangements of coalescent parts. Integration
drives the studies of every discipline and field, permeates our thinking about
theory, and guides our research. It seems that it is part of nature’s work to
provide for interaction and integration. The animal kingdom endeavors to
build structures (humans build artifacts) and integrate structures (or artifacts) into systems.
We distinguish between those objects that merely interact, leaving no lasting change on one or the other object, with that of a dependency in which one
object relies on the other for sustainment. It would seem a safe presumption
that the essence of integration lies somewhere in the realm of the discussion
on causality. There is academic support for structural realism (also termed
neorealism) and object. But it is insufficient to begin the discussion of integration with causality. While causality is causal, it is not the root of causality. So,
while David Hume has positioned causality as the “cement of the universe,”
unfortunately, causality is a concept with which we have continued to struggle. However, a somewhat satisfying explanation for integration can be
gleaned from a discussion on mechanisms. The relations between causality
and mechanism are often obscured and tortured by confounding symptoms
of causal factors. We sometimes find it satisfying to think in terms of mechanisms. A mechanistic view invokes a sensibility about the relation between
cause and effect. Mechanisms, depending on the philosophical bent, help
determine your view of reality; issues of stability can be thought of as driven
by mechanisms. A mechanism can be thought of as resulting from a process