These are truly random thoughts! Just like we scratch on a pad - I thought I will just log these - the reader may not make sense of why and what - but lets see if these thoughts let me emerge something!
Science, Knowledge and Innovation have been three words repeated coming in recent discussions and my readings as well. How are these three related? Is there a science of Innovation? what is knowledge of science? what is science of knowledge? what is knowledge of Innovation? what is Innovation in knowlegde?
The three word questions - what is knowledge of Innovation Science? What is Science of Knowledge Innovation? What is Innovation in science knowledge? what is innovation in knowledge science?
One book that keeps on coming to me is Sciences of the Artifical by Herbert Simon. He talks about the nearly decomposable systems as the approximation to hierarchical systems that we have designed everywhere - the artifact - as opposed to natural is the produce of human mind - well one can argue that human mind anyway is natural so whatever it produces is natural - yet it is pertinent to ask this question of what are the sciences of the artificial as opposed to natural sciences - one may recall physics, chemistry biology have been categorized as natural sciences.
Simon talks about the design science, science of making, - yet the science of innovation is missed out in this seminal book - although it is clear when we think about Innovation Science of Science of Innovation, Sciences of the Artificial have to be the basis compared to sciences of the natural.
Let us look at TRIZ - Theory of Inventive Problem solving - genesis lies in physics and chemsitry patents/inventions. Although it is sold as the so called Innovation as an Exact Science, I think since the genesis is in models/methods of natural science - TRIZ needs to looked as Principles/methods of natural sciences. In fact I think if we start with the sciences of the artificial and combine with TRIZ - we may have more stronger field of Innovation Science emerging!
Hope these are sufficiently random to make any cohesive meaning. If yes, my purpose is served - if one can still make any meaning - obviously the randomness is not there in these thoughts- I shall try again - later to make a Random weblog!