Set of graphic symbols for visual modeling in social-humanitarian knowledge

Dmitriy M. Koshlakov 
Insti­tute of Phi­los­o­phy, Russ­ian Acad­e­my of Sci­ences
Bryan­sk State Tech­ni­cal Uni­ver­si­ty

Set of graph­ic sym­bols for visu­al mod­el­ing in social-human­i­tar­i­an knowl­edge

Abstract. The paper rais­es and dis­cuss­es the research prob­lem of knowl­edge visu­al­iza­tion. It is stat­ed that the sci­en­tif­ic knowl­edge knows a lot of visu­al lan­guages that allow us to describe and trans­mit knowl­edge, stim­u­late the cog­ni­tive process and pro­vide it with a suf­fi­cient­ly high lev­el of for­mal­iz­ing. How­ev­er, as men­tioned in the paper, the avail­abil­i­ty of visu­al lan­guages in social and human­i­tar­i­an knowl­edge is cur­rent­ly insuf­fi­cient, which is due to the fact that there are no gen­er­al and rich in con­tent visu­al lan­guages describ­ing social and human­i­tar­i­an process­es. The paper con­sid­ers the the­o­ret­i­cal basis of the author’s pro­posed solu­tion to the pre­vi­ous­ly posed prob­lem of deficit of avail­able visu­al lan­guages. The author notes that visu­al epis­te­mol­o­gy should be one of the­o­ret­i­cal state­ments of research into the uses of visu­al lan­guages. Anoth­er sig­nif­i­cant the­o­ret­i­cal basis sug­gest­ed for solv­ing the prob­lem are the ideas of func­tion­al asym­me­try of the human brain, con­sid­ered in the con­text of so-called com­put­er metaphor. The third the­o­ret­i­cal basis of the solu­tion embraces the con­cepts of visu­al lan­guage, visu­al mod­el­ing, and visu­al mod­el. The author pro­pos­es the set of graph­ic sym­bols, the basic ele­ments of which are two signs – the sign of the object and the sign of the rela­tion­ship between objects. Fur­ther­more, the author pro­pos­es addi­tion­al signs for indi­cate var­i­ous types of links and rela­tions between objects. The paper states that in addi­tion to cog­ni­tive func­tions, visu­al mod­el­ing per­forms a sig­nif­i­cant com­mu­nica­tive func­tion, as it makes the results of the cog­ni­tive process more vis­i­ble and more con­ve­nient for per­cep­tion. The author empha­sizes the vari­abil­i­ty of visu­al mod­el­ing process­es and stress­es that these process­es large­ly depend on the aes­thet­ic con­scious­ness of the cog­niz­ing sub­ject. Such depen­dence indi­cates that epis­te­mol­o­gy and aes­thet­ics are some­how inter­twined in visu­al mod­el­ing. The final part of the paper sum­ma­rizes the results of the research. The author notes that the set of visu­al signs as com­po­nents of the visu­al lan­guage pro­posed by the author can be suc­cess­ful­ly used in solv­ing such prob­lems as: sys­tem­at­ic descrip­tion and visu­al mod­el­ling of com­plex process­es and sys­tems, both in social and human­i­tar­i­an fields and beyond them; mod­el­ling, descrip­tion and analy­sis of text, dis­course, rea­son­ing.

Key­words: con­nec­tion, knowl­edge, knowl­edge visu­al­iza­tion, object, process, sym­bol, sys­tem, visu­al epis­te­mol­o­gy, visu­al lan­guage, visu­al mod­el, visu­al mod­el­ing

DOI: 10.32326/2618–9267–2021–4–2–107–124


  1. Abra­ham­sen, A., Bech­tel, W. “Dia­grams as tools for sci­en­tif­ic rea­son­ing”, Review of Phi­los­o­phy and Psy­chol­o­gy, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 117–131.
  2. Antonovs­ki, A.Yu. Sot­sioepis­te­mologiya: O pros­transtven­no-vre­men­nykh i lich­nos­t­nykh izmereniyakh obshch­est­va [Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy: about Space-time and Per­son­al-col­lec­tive Dimen­sion of Soci­ety]. Мoscow: Kanon+ ROOI “Reabil­i­tat­siya” Publ., 2011. (In Russ­ian)
  3. Ardashkin, I.B. “K vopro­su o vizual­izat­sii znaniya i infor­mat­sii: rol smart-tekhnologii” [On visu­al­iza­tion of knowl­edge and infor­ma­tion: the role of smart tech­nolo­gies], ΠΡΑΞΗΜΑ. Jour­nal of Visu­al Semi­otics, 2018, vol. 18. no. 4, pp. 12–48. (In Russ­ian)
  4. Arn­heim, R. “V zash­chi­tu vizualno­go mysh­leniya” [A plea for visu­al think­ing], in: R. Arnkheim, Novye ocher­ki po psikhologii iskusst­va [New Essays on the Psy­chol­o­gy of Art]. Мoscow: Prom­e­tei Publ., 1994, рр. 153–172. (In Russ­ian)
  5. Bertolot­ti, T. “From Mind­less Mod­el­ing to Sci­en­tif­ic Mod­els”, in: L. Mag­nani, P. Li (eds), Phi­los­o­phy and Cog­ni­tive Sci­ence. Stud­ies in Applied Phi­los­o­phy, Epis­te­mol­o­gy and Ratio­nal Ethics, vol. 2. Berlin, Hei­del­berg: Springer, 2012, pp. 75–104.
  6. Bre­dekamp, H. “Gaz­ing hands and blind spots: Galileo as drafts­man”, Sci­ence in Con­text, 2000, vol. 13, no. 3–4, pp. 423–462.
  7. Cao, L. “Visu­al mod­el­ing”, in: L. Cao, Meta­syn­thet­ic Com­put­ing and Engi­neer­ing of Com­plex Sys­tems. In: L.C. Jain, X. Wu (eds.), Advanced Infor­ma­tion and Knowl­edge Pro­cess­ing. Lon­don: Springer, 2015, pp. 131–168.
  8. Cat, J. “On under­stand­ing: Maxwell on the meth­ods of illus­tra­tion and sci­en­tif­ic metaphor”, Stud­ies in His­to­ry and Phi­los­o­phy of Mod­ern Physics, 2001, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 395–441.
  9. Chen, M., Flori­di, L., Bor­go, R. “What is visu­al­iza­tion real­ly for?”, in: L. Flori­di, P. Illari (eds.), The Phi­los­o­phy of Infor­ma­tion Qual­i­ty. Syn­these Library (Stud­ies in Epis­te­mol­o­gy, Log­ic, Method­ol­o­gy, and Phi­los­o­phy of Sci­ence), vol. 358. Cham: Springer, 2014, pp. 75–93.
  10. Chernigov­skaya, T.V. “‘Do opy­ta pri­o­bre­li cher­ty…’. Mozg che­love­ka i poro­di­vshiy ego yazyk” [“Pri­or to any learn­ing acquired their traits…”. Human brain results from lan­guage], Logos, 2014, no. 1, pp. 79–96. (In Russ­ian)
  11. Chernigov­skaya, T.V. Cheshirskaya uly­b­ka kota Shredingera: yazyk i soz­nanie [Schrödinger Cat Cheshire Smile: Lan­guage and Con­scious­ness]. Мoscow: Yazy­ki slavyan­skoy kul­tu­ry Publ., 2013. (In Russ­ian)
  12. Gaines, B.R. “Design­ing visu­al lan­guages for descrip­tion log­ics”, Jour­nal of Log­ic, Lan­guage and Infor­ma­tion, 2009, vol. 18, pp. 217–250.
  13. Gia­rdi­no, V., Green­berg, G. “Intro­duc­tion: vari­eties of iconic­i­ty”, Review of Phi­los­o­phy and Psy­chol­o­gy, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 1–25.
  14. Good­ing, D. “Visu­al­i­sa­tion, infer­ence and expla­na­tion in the sci­ences”, Stud­ies in Mul­ti­dis­ci­pli­nar­i­ty, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 1–25.
  15. Good­ing, D.С. “From phe­nom­e­nol­o­gy to field the­o­ry: Faraday’s visu­al rea­son­ing”, Per­spec­tives on Sci­ence, 2006, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 40–65.
  16. Irv­ing, Z.C. “Style, but sub­stance: An epis­te­mol­o­gy of visu­al ver­sus numer­i­cal rep­re­sen­ta­tion in sci­en­tif­ic prac­tice”, Phi­los­o­phy of Sci­ence, 2011, vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 774–787.
  17. Jack­son, S.T. “Intro­duc­tion: Hum­boldt, Ecol­o­gy, and the Cos­mos”, in: S.T. Jack­son (ed.), Essay on the Geog­ra­phy of Plants. Alexan­der von Hum­boldt and Aimé Bon­pland. Chica­go, Lon­don: The Uni­ver­si­ty of Chica­go Press, 2009, pp. 1–46.
  18. Khan, I., Islam, N., Ur Rehman, H., Khan, M. “A com­par­a­tive study of graph­ic sym­bol recog­ni­tion meth­ods”, Mul­ti­me­dia Tools and Appli­ca­tions, 2020, vol. 79, pp. 8695–8725.
  19. Klinke, H. “Intro­duc­tion: the image and the mind”, in: H. Klinke (ed.), Art The­o­ry as Visu­al Epis­te­mol­o­gy. Cam­bridge: Cam­bridge Schol­ars Pub­lish­ing, 2014, pp. 1–10.
  20. Knorr Ceti­na, K., Brug­ger, U. “Rynok kak objekt privyazan­nos­ti: issle­dovanie post­sot­sial­nykh otnoshenii na finansovykh rynkakh” [The mar­ket as an object of attach­ment: explor­ing post­so­cial rela­tions in finan­cial mar­kets], in: V. Vakhsh­tayn (ed.), Sot­si­ologiya veshchey [Soci­ol­o­gy of Things]. Мoscow: Ter­ri­toriya budushchego Publ., 2006, pp. 307–341. (In Russ­ian)
  21. Koshlakov, D.M. “Opyt vizualno­go mod­elirovaniya v proek­tirovanii uchebno­go prot­ses­sa” [The expe­ri­ence of visu­al mod­el­ing in design­ing of the edu­ca­tion­al process], Ergodizain [Ergode­sign], 2020, no. 3, pp. 149–155. (In Russ­ian)
  22. Koshlakov, D.M. “Vizual­izat­siya znaniy v anal­ize perevooruzheniya armii s poz­it­sii voen­noy ergonomi­ki (soderzhatel­nye primery)” [Knowl­edge visu­al­iza­tion in the analy­sis of mil­i­tary process­es (infor­ma­tive exam­ples)], Ergodizain [Ergode­sign], 2019, no. 3, pp. 127–137. (In Russ­ian)
  23. Latour, B. Nau­ka v deystvii: sle­duya za ucheny­mi i inzhen­era­mi vnu­tri obshch­est­va [Sci­ence in Action: How to Fol­low Sci­en­tists and Engi­neers Through Soci­ety]. Saint Peters­burg: Pub­lish­ing House of the Euro­pean Univ. in St. Peters­burg, 2013. (In Russ­ian)
  24. Latour, B. “Vizual­izat­siya i poz­nanie: izo­brazhaya veshchi vmeste” [Visu­al­iza­tion and cog­ni­tion: draw­ing things togeth­er], Logos, 2017, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 95–156. (In Russ­ian)
  25. Luh­mann, N. Vve­de­nie v sis­tem­nuyu teoriyu [Intro­duc­tion to Sys­tem The­o­ry]. Мoscow: Logos Publ., 2007. (In Russ­ian)
  26. Lynch, M. “Sci­ence in the age of mechan­i­cal repro­duc­tion: moral and epis­temic rela­tions between dia­grams and pho­tographs”, Biol­o­gy and Phi­los­o­phy, 1991, no. 6, pp. 205–226.
  27. Medvedev, V.I. “Yazyk kak objekt poz­naniya: Osoben­nos­ti nauk o che­loveke” [Lan­guage as an object of knowl­edge: spe­cif­ic fea­tures of Human­i­ties], Nauch­no-tekhnich­eskie vedo­mosti SPbG­PU. Guman­i­tarnye i obshch­estven­nye nau­ki [St. Peters­burg State Poly­tech­nicаl Uni­ver­si­ty Jour­nal: Human­i­ties and Social Sci­ences], 2017, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 52–60. (In Russ­ian)
  28. Mudragey, N.S. “Rat­sion­al­nost v nauke i v irrat­sion­al­noy filosofii” [Ratio­nal­i­ty in sci­ence and in irra­tional phi­los­o­phy], in: V.A. Lek­torskii (ed.), Na puti k neklas­sich­eskoy epis­te­mologii [Towards Non-Clas­si­cal Epis­te­mol­o­gy]. Мoscow: IPhRAS Publ., 2009, pp. 151–162. (In Russ­ian)
  29. Pogozhi­na, N.N. “Sis­tem­naya teoriya N. Lumana v prilozhenii k anal­izu nauch­noy kom­mu­nikat­sii” [Luhmann’s the­o­ry of sys­tems in the appli­ca­tion to the analy­sis of sci­en­tif­ic com­mu­ni­ca­tion], Epis­te­mologiya i filosofiya nau­ki, 2019, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 225–232. (In Russ­ian)
  30. Romanows­ki, S. “Humboldt’s pic­to­r­i­al sci­ence: an analy­sis of the Tableau physique des Andes et pays voisins”, in: S.T. Jack­son (ed.), Essay on the Geog­ra­phy of Plants. Alexan­der von Hum­boldt and Aimé Bon­pland. Chica­go, Lon­don: The Uni­ver­si­ty of Chica­go Press, 2009, pp. 157–197.
  31. Rus­sell, B. Osno­vaniya matem­ati­ki. Prilozhe­nie V. “Teoriya tipov” [The prin­ci­ples of Math­e­mat­ics. Appen­dix B. Type the­o­ry], Vest­nik Tom­sko­go gosu­darstvenno­go uni­ver­site­ta. Seriya Filosofiya. Sot­si­ologiya. Poli­tologiya, 2008, no. 1, pp. 123–129. (In Russ­ian)
  32. Rus­sell, B. “Vve­de­nie” [Intro­duc­tion], in: L. Vit­gen­shtein, Logiko-filosof­skiy trak­tat [Trac­ta­tus Logi­co-Philo­soph­i­cus]. Мoscow: “Kanon+” ROOI “Reabil­i­tat­siya” Publ., 2008, pp. 10–31. (In Russ­ian)
  33. Seliv­er­stov, V.V. “Sverk­hon­tologiya Alek­siusa Maynon­ga: Po tu storonu bytiya i nebytiya” [Alex­ius Meinong’s extraon­tol­ogy: beyond Being and Non-Being], Epis­te­mologiya i filosofiya nau­ki, 2021, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 220–234. (In Russ­ian)
  34. Shapin, S., Schaf­fer, S. Leviathan and the Air-pump. Hobbes, Boyle, and the Exper­i­men­tal Life. Prince­ton: Prince­ton Uni­ver­si­ty Press, 1985.
  35. Shiyan, T.A. “Skhema­ti­zat­siya, iskusstven­nye “yazy­ki” i prot­sessy pred­metno­go zamykaniya” [Schema­ti­za­tion, arti­fi­cial lan­guages and process­es of sub­ject clos­ing], in: I.T. Kasavin, A.M. Feigel­man (eds), Revolyut­syia i evolyut­syia: mod­eli razvi­tiya v nauke, kul­ture, sot­si­ume [Rev­o­lu­tion and Evo­lu­tion: Mod­els of Devel­op­ment in Sci­ence, Cul­ture, Soci­ety]. Nizh­ny Nov­gorod: N.I. Lobachevsky State Univ. of Nizh­ny Nov­gorod Publ., 2017, pp. 261–264. (In Russ­ian)
  36. Shin, S.-J. “The mys­tery of deduc­tion and dia­gram­mat­ic aspects of rep­re­sen­ta­tion”, Review of Phi­los­o­phy and Psy­chol­o­gy, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 49–67.
  37. Spenser Brown, G. Laws of Form. New York: The Julian Press, Inc., 1972.
  38. Sukhov, A.O. “Razrabot­ka instru­men­tal­nykh sred­stv soz­daniya vizual­nykh pred­met­no-ori­en­tirovan­nykh yazykov” [Devel­op­ment of Tools for Cre­at­ing Visu­al Domain-Spe­cif­ic Lan­guages]. Perm: ISP RAS Publ., 2013. (In Russ­ian)
  39. Tver­sky, B. “The cog­ni­tive design of tools of thought”, Review of Phi­los­o­phy and Psy­chol­o­gy, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 99–116.
  40. Vakhsh­tayn, V. “Dzhon Lo: sot­si­ologiya mezh­du semi­otikoy i topolo­giey” [John Law: a soci­ol­o­gy between semi­otics and topol­o­gy], Sot­si­o­logich­eskoe obozre­nie [Soci­o­log­i­cal Review], 2006, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 25–30. (In Russ­ian)
  41. Wittgen­stein, L. “Filosof­skie issle­dovaniya” [Philo­soph­i­cal inves­ti­ga­tions], in: K. Korol­e­va (ed.), Yazy­ki kak obraz mira [Lan­guages as an Image of the World] / transl. from Eng­lish and Ger­man. Мoscow: AST Publ.; St. Peters­burg: Ter­ra Fan­tas­ti­ca Publ., 2003, pp. 220–546. (In Russ­ian)
  42. Wittgen­stein, L. “Trac­ta­tus logi­co-philo­soph­i­cus (s par­al­lel­ny­mi kom­men­tariya­mi V. Rud­ne­va)” [Trac­ta­tus logi­co-philo­soph­i­cus (with par­al­lel com­ments by V. Rud­nev)], in: L. Wittgen­stein, Izbran­nye rabo­ty [Select­ed Works]. Мoscow: Ter­ri­toriya budushchego Publ., 2005, pp. 7–228. (In Russ­ian)

Comments are closed.