{"id":3181,"date":"2023-06-07T18:38:17","date_gmt":"2023-06-07T16:38:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/?p=3181"},"modified":"2023-06-07T18:40:05","modified_gmt":"2023-06-07T16:40:05","slug":"osint-as-a-conceptual-search-engine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/osint-as-a-conceptual-search-engine\/","title":{"rendered":"OSINT AS A CONCEPTUAL SEARCH ENGINE (G. Nacci)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<pre class=\"wp-block-verse\"><sup>Podcast Transcription.  Originally published in November, 2019 on Spreaker <a href=\"https:\/\/www.spreaker.com\/user\/giovanninacci\/osint-come-motore-di-ricerca-concettuale\">https:\/\/www.spreaker.com\/user\/giovanninacci\/osint-come-motore-di-ricerca-concettuale<\/a> and YouTube <a href=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/YqqnAbWGLe0\">https:\/\/youtu.be\/YqqnAbWGLe0<\/a>. See also \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/40131942\/The_General_Theory_for_Open_Source_Intelligence_in_brief_A_proposal\">The General Theory for Open Source Intelligence in brief. A proposal<\/a>\u201c on Academia.edu.<\/sup><\/pre>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.it\/Open-Source-Intelligence-Application-Layer\/dp\/8899647712\">Open Source Intelligence Application Layer<\/a>\u201c (Nacci, G., 2017, Edizioni Epok\u00e9), the idea is that \u201cOpen Source Intelligence\u201d can also be considered as \u201cIntelligence of Disciplines\u201d, as disciplines are considered as (open) sources of human knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Disciplines are definable as \u201cartefactual partitions of knowledge\u201d<\/strong>, created to facilitate education and teaching, i.e., the transmission of homogeneous areas of knowledge. The perimeter of these \u201careas of homogeneous knowledge\u201d is drawn by man in a more or less precise, more or less defined manner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\"  id=\"_ytid_20926\"  width=\"560\" height=\"315\"  data-origwidth=\"560\" data-origheight=\"315\"  data-relstop=\"1\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/YqqnAbWGLe0?enablejsapi=1&#038;autoplay=0&#038;cc_load_policy=0&#038;cc_lang_pref=&#038;iv_load_policy=1&#038;loop=0&#038;rel=0&#038;fs=1&#038;playsinline=0&#038;autohide=2&#038;theme=dark&#038;color=red&#038;controls=1&#038;\" class=\"__youtube_prefs__  epyt-is-override  no-lazyload\" title=\"YouTube player\"  allow=\"fullscreen; accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture\" allowfullscreen data-no-lazy=\"1\" data-skipgform_ajax_framebjll=\"\"><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A clear and rigid definition of the disciplinary perimeter favours the acquisition of knowledge by learners but <strong>is probably not the best condition for research activities and the innovation of disciplinary constructs<\/strong>. So if the concept of discipline &#8211; which derives from \u201cdisciple\u201d, as disciple derives from the Latin <em>discere<\/em> i.e. \u201cto learn\u201d &#8211; relates to the systematization of what is already known, the concept of \u201cresearch\u201d, on the other hand, relates to \u201cany study activity that has as its aim the acquisition of NEW knowledge\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Although research activities are carried out within disciplinary boundaries, it is clear that discipline and research have somewhat contrasting, if not opposing, attitudes.<strong> Disciplines tend to group, classify and historicize concepts<\/strong>. Research, on the other hand, tends to <strong>deconstruct them, and relocate them, innovating the topology and topography of the networks of relations<\/strong> that connect them.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/102899569\/OSINT_AS_A_CONCEPTUAL_SEARCH_ENGINE\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/102899569\/OSINT_AS_A_CONCEPTUAL_SEARCH_ENGINE noreferrer noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3182\" width=\"361\" height=\"469\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image.png 566w, https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-231x300.png 231w, https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-560x728.png 560w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 361px) 100vw, 361px\" \/><\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It is precisely at this point that &#8211; in research &#8211; the need for an effective interdisciplinary praxis emerges strongly. In other words:<strong> the need for behaviours and postures that facilitate (and not limit) this activity of exploration, conceptual deconstruction and reconstruction becomes a priority<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But where does \u201cOpen Source Intelligence\u201d come in, and where does our proposed General Theory for Open Source Intelligence come in? It was mentioned earlier how one of the main arguments of General Theory is to consider every object under observation as a \u201cpotential source\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">So, if disciplines can be considered as \u201csources of knowledge\u201d then perhaps it is not so bold to assume that<strong> \u201cconcepts\u201d (understood as systems of ideas and notions that express the essential and constant features of a given reality) are the sources of \u201cdisciplinary knowledge\u201d<\/strong>. A clarification: the concept of \u201cconcept\u201d (forgive the necessary repetition) concerns something (thought or idea) that is formed within the mind of an individual.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Therefore, it is something that &#8211; according to the classification offered by Nonaka<a id=\"_ftnref1\" href=\"#_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> &#8211; can certainly be classified as \u201ctacit knowledge\u201d. But \u201ctacit knowledge\u201d &#8211; i.e., that of individuals, that which is not narrated externally &#8211; cannot be shared, so in a sense,<strong> it cannot materially participate in the construction of \u201cdisciplinary knowledge\u201d.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This means that the \u201csources\u201d of disciplines (i.e., the \u201cmaking\u201d of disciplines) are not (or not only) concepts. <strong>What really \u201cmake\u201d the disciplines are the narratives that individuals make of their concepts.<\/strong> And &#8211; therefore &#8211; in essence the \u201cexternalization practices\u201d of the \u201ctacit knowledge\u201d possessed by individuals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">However, the process affecting the \u201clearner\u201d is exactly the opposite, i.e. the \u201cinternalization\u201d of the explicit knowledge made explicit by the disciplines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Even research activities necessarily present this oscillating trend between <strong>phases of \u201csilencing of explicit knowledge\u201d and phases of \u201cexplication of tacit knowledge\u201d.<\/strong> The difference is that in research this process does not take place within a single disciplinary perimeter, i.e. within a single discipline (as it does for both teacher and learner).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Research activities tend to trespass and overlap disciplinary perimeters, they follow necessarily transversal paths. Research activities carry with them their epistemic payload and are critical of the formalisms and classifications that the pre-constituted disciplinary spheres convey from time to time<strong>. And it is precisely in this commission that the engine of interdisciplinarity and disciplinary innovation lies<\/strong>. It is an engine that is undoubtedly powerful but which &#8211; precisely because of its \u201cperformance\u201d &#8211; may expose it to the risk of undesirable (sometimes even ruinous) excursions \u201coff the road\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The idea is that <strong>if &#8211; as mentioned &#8211; we consider concepts and disciplines as \u201csources\u201d, then it is possible to apply the methods and systems of the \u201cGeneral Theory for the Open Sources Intelligence\u201d also to \u201cdisciplinary knowledge\u201d<\/strong> (and disciplinary knowledge is hopefully always \u201copen\u201d).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Moving within knowledge, concepts, and narratives of concepts, navigating within the processes of internalization\/externalization of concepts and knowledge, and constructing heuristic paths within the complex web of relations between knowledge, concepts and knowledge is certainly a complex task.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But one cannot help but notice the relevance of the above to an idea of a \u201cnetwork of sources\u201d, as described within the Trilogy dedicated to General Theory.<strong> Probably \u201cresearch activities\u201d (in any disciplinary field, for any purpose) are the closest thing to the true essence of \u201cintelligence\u201d<\/strong>, understood as a \u201cseamless information process aimed at achieving strategic advantage\u201d (where \u201cstrategic advantage\u201d can be defined as \u201cthe attainment of epistemic states that are always superior, always better than previous ones\u201d or, in essence, the acquisition of ever-new knowledge).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">What we decide to do with this wealth of knowledge, <strong>what we decide to do with this \u201cstrategic advantage\u201d is no longer a matter of \u201cintelligence\u201d, but of intellect<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.intellisfera.it\">www.intellisfera.it<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/t.me\/intellisfera\">t.me\/intellisfera<\/a>&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" id=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Nonaka I., Takeuchi H., The Knowledge Creating Company, University Press, Oxford 1995<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><br><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Podcast Transcription. Originally published in November, 2019 on Spreaker https:\/\/www.spreaker.com\/user\/giovanninacci\/osint-come-motore-di-ricerca-concettuale and YouTube https:\/\/youtu.be\/YqqnAbWGLe0. See also \u201cThe General Theory for Open Source Intelligence in brief. A proposal\u201c on Academia.edu. In \u201cOpen Source Intelligence Application Layer\u201c (Nacci, G., 2017, Edizioni Epok\u00e9), the idea is that \u201cOpen Source Intelligence\u201d can also be considered as \u201cIntelligence of Disciplines\u201d, as &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/osint-as-a-conceptual-search-engine\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;OSINT AS A CONCEPTUAL SEARCH ENGINE (G. Nacci)&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3182,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,32,547,37],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3181","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-il-ragionamento","category-metodi","category-podcast","category-teoria-dellintelligence","has-thumbnail"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3181","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3181"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3181\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3182"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3181"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3181"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.giovanninacci.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3181"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}