The First Law of Software Knowledge Process
Creating a process

The statement of First Law of Software Process doesn't actually mention software.  And it really pertains to any process that applies knowledge.  I think this is rather self-evident--how can you apply knowledge if you don't possess it?  

• The First Law (restated for knowledge in general): You can only have a process for applying knowledge if you already have that knowledge.
  
  By "applying knowledge" I mean anything that uses knowledge in any way: building an artifact, writing a book, teaching someone,...
  There are two kinds of knowledge needed here: 

  • The knowledge that is to be used / imparted / applied and...

  • The knowledge of how to use / impart / apply that knowledge.

This is simply a restatement of the necessary knowledge and process described earlier.
These knowledge types are related, but they are not the same.  For example, in an educational environment they are the subject--the thing to be taught and didactic process--the teaching method.  In a book, they are the words and the activity of reading.  In music they are the score and the activity of playing the instrument.  

The later statement of The Reflexive Creation of Systems and Processes further describes this duality. 

Of course, the question might now arise: "...what about a process for acquiring knowledge"?"  That process depends upon the nature of the knowledge:

• Already Obtained: for knowledge that we already have and is extant in one of the media: brains, books, or software, the source of the knowledge transfer can usually define what would be needed by the recipient to acquire that knowledge.  Thus a teacher can lay out a lesson plan or a learning course on a foreign language can list the order of tapes to listen to and tests to conduct which will reinforce the learning,

• New Knowledge: for knowledge that is entirely new [1] I contend that, while there is or can be "process" it must be more a meta-process than a stepwise prescriptive series of actions.  The meta-process always operates within some level of context of the knowledge being sought.  It may start with a hypothesis that uses what is known about the context and attempts to interpolate or extrapolate from that knowledge to the more specific knowledge or context being sought.  Then some process is applied to prove or disprove the hypothesis.  Occasionally, this experimental activity results in serendipitous findings--things which were neither sought nor considered.  However, if such findings are too far removed from the original context or the hypothesis, they may not be recognized or may even be rejected outright.

Perhaps a restatement of the First Law might include this differentiation [2] 

FOOTNOTES 

[1]  Of course, there are degrees of "newness."  Soemthing might be unknown (ie., "new") to a person that is otherwise known to another.  But the presence of that knowledge itself might be unknown--a form of 2OI--or is simply inaccessible.  In either situation, the person seeking the knowledge is starting with a relatively blank slate.  

[2]  Later, I will break out the lower four Orders of Ignorance into some subsets based upon criteria such as these.