According to #HH_Pattee there are
>“two meanings for #machine and two meanings for #failure”:
>“By the *machinery of nature* we mean the failure-proof #laws that we assume underlie the predictable behavior of matter. When we find certain types of #natural events unpredictable we assume that our description or theory of these events are failures, but not the events themselves.”
>On the other hand, while we assume that the #rules of arithmetic are not subject to failure, it is clear that a physical machine #designed to execute these rules may fail all too often.”
https://www.academia.edu/863887/The_role_of_instabilities_in_the_evolution_of_control_hierarchies
Paraphrased #HH_Pattee from the same source:
This "#error_duality" (error in the #descriptions or error in the #operation) can be identified at all organizational levels:
➡️ Computer programs may have either an error in the program itself (#software error) or an error may happen because of the machine (#hardware error) that executes an otherwise correct program.
➡️ At higher levels it is possible to make an error in the choice of algorithm which is being programmed or even make a mistake in the choice of problem that the developed algorithm is supposed to solve.
➡️ Similarly in social and political organizations we distinguish between a faulty policy and the failure to execute a policy properly.
In other words, we try to distinguish between the ***error in our #models*** of reality which leads to incorrect policies (#predictions and descriptions), and the ***error in #control #constraints*** which leads to a failure of a (good) policy implementation.
