313 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. Teach pluralism before practice. For me, the foundation of systems work is that there is no one right way to respond to complexity.

      .systems thinking

  2. Oct 2021
    1. What I'm interested in is doing this with visual artefacts as source material. What does visual pkm look like? Journaling, scrapbooking, collecting and the like. The most obvious tool is the sketchbook. How does a sketchbook work?

      It builds on many of these traditions, but there is a rather sizeable movement in the physical world as well as lots online of sketchnotes which might fit the bill for you Roy.

      The canonical book/textbook for the space seems to be Sketchnote Handbook, The: the illustrated guide to visual note taking by Mike Rohde.

      For a solid overview of the idea in about 30 minutes, I found this to be a useful video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evLCAYlx4Kw

    1. Academia: All the Lies: What Went Wrong in the University Model and What Will Come in its Place

      “Students are graduating into a brutal job market.”

      The entreprecariat is designed for learned helplessness (social: individualism), trained incapacities (economic: specialization), and bureaucratic intransigence (political: authoritarianism).


      The Design Problem

      Three diagrams will explain the lack of social engagement in design. If (in Figure 1) we equate the triangle with a design problem, we readily see that industry and its designers are concerned only with the tiny top portion, without addressing themselves to real needs.

      Figure 1: The Design Problem

      (Design for the Real World, 2019. Page 57.)

      The other two figures merely change the caption for the figure.

      • Figure 1: The Design Problem
      • Figure 2: A Country
      • Figure 3: The World
    1. Education and job hiring should be integrated.

      Systemic Problems

      The problem is systemic. How do you deal with the problem when the system is off the table when it comes to the design problem?

    1. COPE: Create Once, Publish Everywhere

      Adaptive Content

      COPE: Create Once, Publish Everywhere

      With the growing need and ability to be portable comes tremendous opportunity for content providers. But it also requires substantial changes to their thinking and their systems.

  3. Sep 2021
    1. Our efforts at education and training, as well as management and leadership, are aimed principally at promoting brain-bound thinking.

      In many areas of human life including education and business, we limit ourselves too heavily by too exclusively promoting and preferring brain-bound thinking. If we could begin to re-center our external thinking as many oral and indigenous cultures have, we might be able to go further and farther.

    2. One last resource for augmenting our minds can be found in other people’s minds. We are fundamentally social creatures, oriented toward thinking with others. Problems arise when we do our thinking alone — for example, the well-documented phenomenon of confirmation bias, which leads us to preferentially attend to information that supports the beliefs we already hold. According to the argumentative theory of reasoning, advanced by the cognitive scientists Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, this bias is accentuated when we reason in solitude. Humans’ evolved faculty for reasoning is not aimed at arriving at objective truth, Mercier and Sperber point out; it is aimed at defending our arguments and scrutinizing others’. It makes sense, they write, “for a cognitive mechanism aimed at justifying oneself and convincing others to be biased and lazy. The failures of the solitary reasoner follow from the use of reason in an ‘abnormal’ context’” — that is, a nonsocial one. Vigorous debates, engaged with an open mind, are the solution. “When people who disagree but have a common interest in finding the truth or the solution to a problem exchange arguments with each other, the best idea tends to win,” they write, citing evidence from studies of students, forecasters and jury members.

      Thinking in solitary can increase one's susceptibility to confirmation bias. Thinking in groups can mitigate this.

      How might keeping one's notes in public potentially help fight against these cognitive biases?

      Is having a "conversation in the margins" with an author using annotation tools like Hypothes.is a way to help mitigate this sort of cognitive bias?

      At the far end of the spectrum how do we prevent this social thinking from becoming groupthink, or the practice of thinking or making decisions as a group in a way that discourages creativity or individual responsibility?

    3. Turning a mental representation into shapes and lines on a page helped them to elucidate more fully what they already knew while revealing with ruthless rigor what they did not yet comprehend.

      The modality shift of putting ideas onto a page like this is similar to the idea behind the Feynman technique.

    4. Moving mental contents out of our heads and onto the space of a sketch pad or whiteboard allows us to inspect it with our senses, a cognitive bonus that the psychologist Daniel Reisberg calls “the detachment gain.”

      Moving ideas from our heads into the real world, whether written or potentially using other modalities, can provide a detachment gain, by which we're able to extend those ideas by drawing, sketching, or otherwise using them.

      How might we use the idea of detachment gain to better effect in our pedagogy? I've heard anecdotal evidence of the benefit of modality shifts in many spaces including creating sketchnotes.

      While some sketchnotes don't make sense to those who weren't present for the original talk, perhaps they're incredibly useful methods for those who are doing the modality shifts from hearing/seeing into writing/drawing.

    5. Continual engagement with the mental rigors of modern life coincided in many parts of the world with improving nutrition, rising living conditions and reduced exposure to pathogens. These factors produced a century-long climb in average I.Q. scores — a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect, after James Flynn, the political philosopher who identified it.

      The Flynn effect is the substantial and sustained increase in intelligence test scores over most of the twentieth century.

      Research seems to indicate that the effect is environmentally caused: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/26/6674

    6. The result has not been a gratifying bulking up of our neural “muscle.” On the contrary, all the mental effort we’ve mustered over the past year has left many of us feeling depleted and distracted, unequal to the tasks that never stop arriving in our inboxes. When the work we’re putting in doesn’t produce the advertised rewards, we’re inclined to find fault with ourselves. Maybe we’re insufficiently gritty; maybe, we think, we’re just not smart enough. But this interpretation is incorrect.

      We've been gaslighting ourselves about how our brains work. It's not a muscle, having "grit", and many of our attempts at productivity are completely wrong.

    1. https://via.hypothes.is/https://finiteeyes.net/pedagogy/extending-the-mind/

      A well written review of Annie Murphy Paul's The Extended Mind. Matthew Cheney has distilled a lot out of the book from his notes with particular application to improving pedagogy.

      I definitely want to read this with relation to not only using it to improve teaching, but with respect to mnemotechniques and the methods oral and indigenous societies may have either had things right or wrong and what Western culture may have lost as a result. I'm also particularly interested in it for its applications to the use of commonplace books and zettelkasten as methods of extending the mind and tools for thought.

    2. For better or worse, our brains seem activated by conflict.

      How might we use the fact that are brains are activated by conflict to potentially make the social media space better (healthier)?

    3. While the material about just how darn embodied our brains are might have been something of a bummer for someone as uncomfortable being bodied as I am, the material about how much our brains like narratives was just what I wanted to read.

      How might we compare/contrast the ideas behind this with Alex Rosenberg's book How History Gets Things Wrong: The Neuroscience of Our Addiction to Stories?

    4. How to Use These Ideas

      I love that he's not only externalized his thoughts from the book as annotations/notes and then synthesized them into a longer essay, but he's further expanded and externalized them by thinking about how to put them to use!

    5. To use your brain well, get out of your brain. Paul calls this offloading. To think well, she says, “we should offload information, externalize it, move it out of our heads and into the world” (243).

      This is certainly what is happening in the commonplace book tradition and even more explicitly in the zettelkasten tradition.

      What other methods of offloading exist besides writing and speaking? Hand gestures? Dance? What hidden modalities of offloading might indigenous societies use that Western culture might not be cognizant of?

      Often journaling or writing in a diary is a often a means of offloading the psychological cruft of one's day to be able to start afresh.

      This is some of the philosophy behind creating so-called "morning pages".

    6. Social learning does not mean learning without tension or argument. In “Thinking with Peers”, Paul shows that argument and conflict are useful ways to focus attention and strengthen ideas, so long as the arguing is done with a certain amount of openness to new ideas. She approvingly quotes Stanford Business School professor Robert Sutton’s formula for productive conflict: “People should fight as if they are right, and listen as if they are wrong.” The brain, it seems, likes conflict. Or, at least, conflict helps strengthen attention.

      I wonder how this may be leveraged with those who are using Hypothes.is for conversations in the margins in classrooms?

      cc: @remikalir, @jeremydean, @nateangell

      Could teachers specifically sow contention into their conversations? Cross reference the idea of a devil's advocate.

      I love the aphorism:

      “People should fight as if they are right, and listen as if they are wrong.” — Robert Sutton, Stanford Buisness School professor's formula for productive conflict

    7. I wondered about something outside the scope of her book, which is neurodivergence. The Embodied Mind looks at a wide range of studies that all seem to search for the qualities, behaviors, and tendencies of a typical mind. The typical mind, like the typical body, is a statistical figment, an abstraction from tens, hundreds, thousands, and millions of individual minds and bodies, each atypical in its own way. What happens, for instance, to the extended mind of someone with significant physical limitations? (Stephen Hawking seems to have extended his mind pretty well.) A fascinating sequel to Paul’s book might be something along the lines of Oliver Sacks’s writings, a study of neurodivergence, atypicality, and what they can tell us about how we live, learn, and work. As fascinating as the similarities between brains are the differences.

      Looking at neurodivergence within this framing can be an important extension.

      We're definitely not all the same and some of the differences and research on them can potentially help us all.

    8. Small motions are so important that Paul devotes an entire chapter to the value of gestures. “Gestures,” she says, “don’t merely echo or amplify spoken language; they carry out cognitive and communicative functions that language can’t touch” (69). Gestures strengthen our ability to give form to thoughts, they increase the effectiveness of communication, they help groups understand each other, they create and direct attention.

      This likely underlies some of the thoughts I've had about dance and movement and which are touched on by indigenous cultures as documented in Lynne Kelly's work.

    9. Brains don’t think as well in bodies sitting still as they do in bodies performing some sort of low-intensity motion. We know this intuitively — think of how many people, for instance, say they get their best ideas while walking — and yet so many classrooms and workplaces are designed to inihibit movement, designed on the premise that people think best while sitting still. Low-intensity movement improves attention and focus (as anybody who has used fidget toys during meetings knows), and yet we not only don’t design for it, we punish it. “Parents and teachers often believe they have to get kids to stop moving around before they can focus and get down to work,” Paul writes. But “a more constructive approach would be to allow kids to move around so that they can focus” (49).

      Another example of encouraging walking to think

    10. <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>Cathie LeBlanc</span> in Cathie LeBlanc on Twitter: "@ChrisAldrich @AndySylvester99 @finiteeyes wrote a summary of a new book you might be interested in: https://t.co/Eor8pRBgkz" / Twitter (<time class='dt-published'>09/13/2021 08:53:46</time>)</cite></small>

      I'd also heard about this book last week via Joel Chan's tweet: https://twitter.com/JoelChan86/status/1433798115807711237

      @RoamBookClub next book? Extended Mind draws on distributed cognition, which is a powerful theoretical perspective for understanding #toolsforthought and #BASB https://t.co/CJixnXajw3

      — Joel Chan is synthesizing knowledge (@JoelChan86) September 3, 2021
      <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

    1. We hear a lot about how amazing the brain is, but the lesser-known scientific story from the past 20 years is how much researchers have learned about the brain’s limits. These limits are not a matter of individual differences in intelligence; they are common to all our brains. They’re a product of the brain’s status as a biological organ, one that evolved to do things that are very different from what we ask of it in our complex, knowledge-centric modern world.Drawing on the resources of the extended mind allows the brain to “overachieve,” to do more than would be possible on its own. In fact, we can think of experts among us as those people who have mastered the art of thinking outside the brain. Research shows that top performers don’t do it all in their heads; they achieve their superior results by integrating internal and external resources.When we intentionally cultivate the capacity to think outside the brain, a new world of possibility opens up; we gain access to reserves of intuition, memory, attention, and motivation that are not available to the naked brain. In order to think the intelligent, informed, original thoughts we’re capable of, we can’t rely on the brain alone. We have to think outside the brain.

      This vindicates the idea of [[Zettelkasten]], if I need to be an expert, I need to think outside the brain, I really cried when I read that line, I mean even I can feel like after externalizing my thinking, I can connect seemingly different concepts with one another.

    1. We in the West are used to thinking of the mind and the body as separate. But a burgeoning field called “embodied cognition” is demonstrating that thinking is actually a full-body experience. This is true in a few different ways.First, the internal sensations of the body—our “gut feelings”—guide our perceptions and our reactions. When we learn to tune in to these inner signals, we can use them to make sounder decisions, and even to connect more effectively with other people.Second, the movements our bodies make affect the way we think. We’ve come to believe that serious thinking entails sitting still, but research shows that moving—walking, exercising, acting things out—enhances our mental processes in ways that don’t happen when we’re sitting down.Third, a specific kind of movement—the gestures we make with our hands—extends our thinking by capturing and expressing concepts that we can’t yet put into words. Research shows that our most advanced, most cutting-edge ideas often show up first in the motions of our hands—motions that we then use to inform and construct a verbal account of what we’re thinking.It’s common in our culture to compare the brain to a computer, but this is a deeply flawed analogy. A laptop operates the same whether it is open on a desk in an office or on a bench in a park. But human brains aren’t like that—they are exquisitely sensitive to context. One of the most fertile and fruitful places to “think with” is nature. That’s because, over eons of evolution, our brains were tuned to the kind of sensory information available in the natural world. Spending time in a hard-edged, highly designed, built environment drains our mental resources, while spending time in nature actually replenishes them. We can also deliberately arrange the interior spaces we occupy in ways that extend our thinking. Research shows that it’s especially important that we feel a sense of control and ownership over the space in which we do our learning or working. It’s also important to incorporate into these spaces cues of identity—that is, objects or symbols of who you are, what you’re doing in that space—and also cues of belonging—objects or symbols that represent your membership in a group that’s meaningful to you.

      I feel like maybe I should start thinking in the nature and I also feel like I need to design my environment in such a way that it facilitates thinking

    2. More than 20 years ago, two philosophers, Andy Clark and David Chalmers wrote a journal article that opened with a question: “Where does the mind stop and the rest of the world begin?” Now, that question would seem to have an obvious answer, right? The mind stops at the head. It’s contained within the skull. But Clark and Chalmers maintained that this assumption—as common as it is—is wrong. The mind, they said, takes elements from outside the head and draws them into the thinking process. These mental “extensions” allow us to think in ways our brains couldn’t manage on their own. They called this phenomenon “the extended mind.”

      This is certainly true, a lot of things that we see and come across affect our thinking and is also highlights that some seemingly obvious answers are wrong when seen in a superficial manner, every question needs to be thought deeply.

    1. In a postwar world in which educational self-improvement seemed within everyone’s reach, the Great Books could be presented as an item of intellectual furniture, rather like their prototype, the Encyclopedia Britannica (which also backed the project).

      the phrase "intellectual furniture" is sort of painful here...

    1. The press is full of reports that President Biden screwed up the pullout from Afghanistan. But none of the people saying he did it wrong say what he should have done instead.

      I've noticed this phenomenon as well. When criticizing public policy, writers should be required to write down their alternate plans and then go at least one or two levels deep as to the knock on effects that their decisions are likely to have.

      It's easy to criticize, but it's much harder to do the actual work and thinking to actually do something else.

  4. Aug 2021
    1. Analytical thinking takes something apart, system thinking understands what the thing is a part of.Analytical Thinking identifies the properties and behaviors of the parts taken separately, System Thinking understands the behavior of the bigger whole which the thing is a part of.Analytical Thinking aggregates the understanding of the parts into an understanding of the whole, System Thinking understands the role or function of the thing as a part of the whole.

      a) Bu sistemin önemli parçaları nelerdir?

      b) Bu parçaları birbirine bağlayan ve birbirine uyumunu sağlayan başlıca süreçler nelerdir?

      c) Sistemin gerçekleştirmek istediği amaçlar nelerdir?

      Sistem düşüncesi neyin parçası olduğu ile sorgular

    2. Analytical thinking helps us understand how stuff works, system thinking helps us understand why stuff works the way it does.

      Analitik düşünce, sistemin yapısı ile ilgilenip nesnelerin veya olayların nasıl oluştuğunu tanımlamaya çalışırken, Sentez düşüncesi sistemin fonksiyonuna odaklanıp nesnelerin veya olayların niçin meydana geldiğini anlamaya çalışmaktadır.

    3. Analytical Thinking: breaking things apart in order to understand how stuff works by seeing the whole as a sum of its parts.

      Analitik düşünme yöntemi, bütünü parçalarıyla görerek nasıl çalıştığını anlama çabası.

    1. I could quote Luhmann on this as well, who thought that "without writing one cannot think," But there is nothing peculiarly "Luhmannian" about this idea. Isaac Asimov is said to have said "Writing to me is simply thinking through my fingers." And, to give one other example, E. B. White (of "Strunk and White" fame) claimed that "writing is one way to go about thinking." In other words, writing is thinking. And since I do almost all my significant writing in ConnectedText these days, it might be called my "writing environment."

      Various quotes along the lines of "writing is thinking".

      What is the equivalent in oral societies? Memory is thinking?

    1. I have found that the "size of a thought" is usually not much larger than 500 words. Nicholson Baker, who has written an essay on "The Size of Thoughts" thinks that "most are about three feet tall, with the level of complexity of a lawnmower engine, or a cigarette lighter, or those tubes of toothpaste that, by mingling several hidden pastes and gels, create a pleasantly striped product." Mine are a lot smaller. It takes between 50 and 500 words for me to express one thought or one idea (or perhaps better a fragment of a thought or an idea, because thoughts and ideas usually are compounds of such fragments). See also Steven Berlin Johnson on his experiences with an electronic outliner, called Devonthink: http://www.stevenberlinjohnson.com/movabletype/archives/000230.html.

      What is the size of a single thought?

      500 words is about the size of a typical blog post. It's also about the size of a minimum recommended post for SEO purposes.

      Nice to see his link to Steven Johnson here as I think this is where I've seen similar thoughts recently myself.

    1. Now, whenever I have a thought worth capturing, I write it on an index card in either marker pen or biro (depending on the length of the thought), and place in the relevant box. I use index cards for books, blogs, conversations I overhear at the club, memories, etc. They’re in my coat pocket when I fetch the kids from school. I leave them handy in the locker at the swimming pool (where I do much of my best thinking). And I run with them. Sound weird? Well, I’m in good company. Ryan Holiday[116], Anne Lamott[117], Robert Greene[118], Oliver Burkeman[119], Ronald Reagan, Vladimir Nabokov[120] and Ludwig Wittgenstein[121] all use (d) the humble index card to catalogue and organise their thoughts. If you’re serious about embarking on this digital journey, buy a hundred-pack of 127 x 76mm ruled index cards for less than a pound, rescue a shoebox from the attic and stick a few marker-penned notecards on their end to act as dividers. Write a “My Digital Box” label on the top of the shoebox, and you’re off.

      apparently a quote from Reset: How to Restart Your Life and Get F.U. Money by David Sawyer FCIPR.

      Notes about users of index card based commonplace books.

    1. For example, his erasable writing tablet is referenced inW. Blunt, Linnaeus: The Compleat Naturalist(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001), 70.

      What form did Carl Linnaeus' erasable writing tablet take?

    1. There are no privileged places in the note-card system, every card is as important as every other card, and no hierarchy is super-imposed on the system. The significance of each card depends on its relation to other cards (or the relation of other cards to it). It is a network; it is not "arboretic." Accordingly, it in some ways anticipates hypertext and the internet.

      Niklas Luhmann's zettelkasten system doesn't impose a heirarchy upon it's contents and in some ways its structure anticipates the ideas of hypertext and the internet's structure.

  5. Jul 2021
    1. u/MushroomPuddle17 days agoGetting started with a commonplace notebook as someone who isn't creative? .t3_ojhwrb ._2FCtq-QzlfuN-SwVMUZMM3 { --postTitle-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; --postTitleLink-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; } Hello everyone!I've known about commonplace books for years and always feel a surge of inspiration when I see them but I'm really not creative. I don't know what I'd ever write in one? I don't ever really have any grand ideas or plans. I don't seem to have conversations or read things that necessarily inspire me. I just live a very regular life where nothing really sticks out to me as important. I've tried bullet journals before and had the same issue.Does anyone have any suggestions? I'd really appreciate it.

      I'm not sure what you mean by your use of the word "creative". I'm worried that you've seen too many photos of decorative and frilly commonplace books on Instagram and Pinterest. I tend to call most of those "productivity porn" as their users spend hours decorating and not enough collecting and expanding their thoughts, which is really their primary use and value. Usually whatever time they think they're "saving" in having a cpb, they're wasting in decorating it. (Though if decorating is your thing, then have at it...) My commonplace is a (boring to others) location of mostly walls of text. It is chock full of creative ideas, thoughts, and questions though. If you're having trouble with a place to start, try creating a (free) Hypothes.is account and highlighting/annotating everything you read online. (Here's what mine looks like: https://hypothes.is/users/chrisaldrich, you'll notice that it could be considered a form of searchable digital commonplace book all by itself.) Then once a day/week/month, take the best of the quotes, ideas, highlights, and your notes, replies, questions and put them into your physical or digital commonplace. Build on them, cross link them, expand on them over time. Do some research to start answering any of the questions you came up with. By starting with annotating things you're personally interested in, you'll soon have a collection of things that become highly valuable and useful to you. After a few weeks you'll start seeing something and likely see a change in the way you're reading, writing, and even thinking.

      reply to: https://www.reddit.com/r/commonplacebook/comments/ojhwrb/getting_started_with_a_commonplace_notebook_as/

    1. The point of Zettelkasten is to digest each thing you read well so you don’t need to go back to look at it again.

      I don't agree with this viewpoint. Just like Heraclitus' river, the information in an article or book may not change, but there is a contextual change in the reader, in their thinking, their circumstances, and their time that may give them a different reading or perspective of the same material at later dates.

      Of course not all material is actually worth reading more than once either. But for some material a second or third reading may help them create new ideas and new links to prior ideas.

    1. the idea is to render very clear the connections between ideas with as little friction as possible.

      The goal of note taking and tools for it is to make capturing ideas and creating connections between them as easy and friction free as possible. This allows note taking come closer to actual thinking with better long term retention.

    2. Carr’s argument is something I resisted for a long time, but his main assertion — that the tools we use to think shape how we think — is hard to ignore.

      While this may be Nicholas Carr's statement, it's actually pre-dated significantly by Marshall McLuhann

    1. I'm currently building Lotu, a tool for intertwingled thinking. It's a space where you store your ideas as building blocks and then you compose them in arbitrary trails. I'd love to collaborate with adjacent projects.
    1. I suspect there's a link here to the broader idea of diffuse thinking...

      <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>Cathie </span> in Why Your Brain Needs Idle Time.  – My Notes (<time class='dt-published'>07/22/2021 13:32:03</time>)</cite></small>

    2. https://elemental.medium.com/why-your-brain-needs-idle-time-e5d90b0ef1df

      This was exactly what I expected it would be. Down time for diffuse thinking...

      Wish they'd included links to studies.

    1. Linnaeus had to manage a conflict between the need to bring information into a fixed order for purposes of later retrieval, and the need to permanently integrate new information into that order, says Mueller-Wille. “His solution to this dilemma was to keep information on particular subjects on separate sheets, which could be complemented and reshuffled,” he says.

      Carl Linnaeus created a method whereby he kept information on separate sheets of paper which could be reshuffled.

      In a commonplace-centric culture, this would have been a fascinating innovation.

      Did the cost of paper (velum) trigger part of the innovation to smaller pieces?

      Did the de-linearization of data imposed by codices (and previously parchment) open up the way people wrote and thought? Being able to lay out and reorder pages made a more 3 dimensional world. Would have potentially made the world more network-like?

      cross-reference McLuhan's idea about our tools shaping us.

    1. Blogging, I want to argue, is a seasoned technology that is ripe for lateral thinking.
    2. I think it was also Robin Sloan who recently directed my attention to this Wikipedia page on the late Nintendo designer Gunpei Yokoi, who promoted what he called “Lateral Thinking with Seasoned Technology”: finding new and unexpected uses for technologies that have been around for a while and therefore (a) have clear patterns of use that you can rely on even when deviating from them, and (b) have decreased in price.

      Something interesting about this that I may want to revisit.

    3. But you know what? Screw it. I need to take my time and develop the necessary ideas properly. If these thoughts never develop in such a way that I can turn them into a book, so be it. If they do so develop and nobody wants to publish it, so be it. (I’ll just make various digital versions.) The point, at this stage in my career, after fifteen published books, is not the publication, it’s the thinking. So let the thinking, in public, commence.

      Some interesting thoughts about thinking and writing in public.

  6. Jun 2021
    1. The essence of systems thinking and practice is in ‘seeing’ the world in a particular way, because how you ‘see’ things affects the way you approach situations or undertake specific tasks. And how you ‘see’ things is influenced heavily by the culture of the society in which you live and work and by your education and training.

      The vedic term is that we all create our own Brahmand ourselves - how we see the world. On a smaller scale how we see the problem. Very often how we see or define the problem will not only impact how we find solutions but also the solution that we find..

    1. This leads us to Markovits’s second critique of the aspirational view: The cycle that produces meritocratic inequality severely harms not only the middle class but the very elite who seem to benefit most from it.

      What if we look at meritocracy from a game theoretic viewpoint?

      Certainly there's an issue that there isn't a cap on meritocratic outputs, so if one wants more wealth, then one needs to "simply" work harder. As a result, in a "keeping up with the Jones'" society that (incorrectly) measures happiness in wealth, everyone is driven to work harder and faster for their piece of the pie.

      (How might we create a sort of "set point" to limit the unbounded meritocratic cap? Might this create a happier set point/saddle point on the larger universal graph?)

      This effect in combination with the general drive to have "power over" people instead of "power with", etc. in combination with racist policies can create some really horrific effects.

      What other compounding effects might there be? This is definitely a larger complexity-based issue.

    1. We should think about the number of simultaneous connections (peak and average) and the message rate/payload size. I think, the threshold to start thinking about AnyCable (instead of just Action Cable) is somewhere between 500 and 1000 connections on average or 5k-10k during peak hours.
      • number of simultaneous connections (peak and average)

      • the message rate/payload size.

    1. When you hear someone say something, stop and ask yourself "Is that true?" Don't say it out loud. I'm not suggesting that you impose on everyone who talks to you the burden of proving what they say, but rather that you take upon yourself the burden of evaluating what they say.
    1. Is Google Making Us Stupid?: What the Internet is doing to our Brains by Nicholas Carr July/August 2008 in The Atlantic

    2. Nicholas Carr is the author of The Shallows and The Glass Cage: Automation and Us. He has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and Wired.

      This author bio had to have been modified after the publication of this article as The Shallows came out in 2010. I have to suspect that a lot of what appears here was early work and research that heavily influenced his subsequent book.

      I remember discussing portions of it with P.M. Forni in preparation of his own book The Thinking Life.

    3. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.

      But are Google's tools really making us more productive thinkers? One might argue that it's attempting to do all the work for us and take out the process of thought all together. We're just rats in a maze hitting a bar to get the food pellet.

      What if the end is a picture of us as the people on the space ship at the end of WALL-E? What if it's keeping us from thinking?

      What if it's making us more shallow thinkers rather than deep thinkers?

      Cross reference P.M. Forni.

    4. “In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”

      This is the problem however. We can't program humans out of the equation entirely, for what is the general enterprise meant for in the first place?

    1. The way to do a piece of writing is three or four times over, never once. For me, the hardest part comes first, getting some-thing--anything--out in front of me. Sometimes in a nervous frenzy I just fling words as if I were flinging mud at a wall. Blurt out, heave out, babble out something--anything-as a first draft. With that, you have acf>ieved a sort of nucleus. Then, as you work it over and alter it, you begin to shape sentences that score higher with the ear and eye. Edit it again-top to bottom. The chances are that about now you'll be see-ing something that you are sort of eager for others to see. And all that takes time. What I have left out is the interstitial time. You finish that first awful blurt-ing, and then you put the thing aside. You get in your car and drive home. On the way, your mind is still knitting at the words. You think of a better way to say something, a good phrase to correct a . certain problem. Without the drafted version-if it did not exist-you obvi-ously would not be thinking of things that would improve it. In short, you may be actually writing only two or three hours a day, but your mind, in one way or another, is working on it twenty-four hours a day-yes, while you sleep-but only if some sort of draft or earlier ver-sion already exists. Until it exists, writ-ing has not really begun."

      Some solid advice not only for writing, but even thinking in general. Writing out your thoughts can help to sharpen and improve them.

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>juanjosefernandez</span> in 📚-reading (<time class='dt-published'>06/04/2021 16:32:12</time>)</cite></small>

    1. Though it is often assumedthat mnemonics were used to memorize speeches, the importance of memory to theinventionofspeech was readily apparent to ancient orators—thus the famous praise of memory as athesauruminventorum(Herennium3.16.28). As Cicero writes inDe Oratore, the orator must commit tomemory“the whole past with its storehouse of examples and precedents,”as well as a knowledgeof all laws general and civil, for without such memories, the orator is left speechless (1.17–18).Expanding on Cicero’s point, Quintilian claims that“it is the power of memory alone that bringsbefore us all the store of precedents, laws, rulings, sayings, and facts which the orator must possessin abundance . . . and hold ready for immediate use”(Institutio11.2.1). The art of memory was thusto be used to recollect not only pre-written orations but also knowledge from a variety of sources tobe called upon when constructing new texts, speakingex tempore, or responding to an interlocutor’sarguments.

      Too often, this seems to me to be a missing piece that few talk about now. Those posting to the Art of Memory forum are usually talking about the need to memorize for memorization's sake. Rarely are they talking about or noticing the second or third level order changes as the result of an improved memory.

  7. May 2021
    1. Think of it as a spectrum. Things we dump into private WhatsApp group chats, DMs, and cavalier Tweet threads are part of our chaos streams - a continuous flow of high noise / low signal ideas. On the other end we have highly performative and cultivated artefacts like published books that you prune and tend for years.Gardening sits in the middle. It's the perfect balance of chaos and cultivation.

      There's something here that's reminiscent of Craig Mod's essay Post Artifact Books and Publishing.

      Reminder to self: revisit this idea.

    1. “Monetising what we see as sacred knowledge, our way of being – driving, walking – is sacred knowledge and the only people who should have any purview over that is our community. … What if we look at what the data could do for our community and how to achieve that? … We are gathering our data because we love our people, we want a better future for the next generations. What if all data was gathered for those reasons? What would it look like?”

      A great quote and framing from Abigail Echo-Hawk.

      This reliance on going to community elders (primarily because they have more knowledge and wisdom) is similar to designing for the commons and working backward. Elders in many indigenous cultures represent the the commons.

      This isn't to say that we shouldn't continue to innovate and explore the evolutionary space for better answers, but going slow and fixing things is far more likely to be helpful than moving fast and breaking things as has been the mode for the last fifteen years. Who's watching the long horizon in these scenarios?

      This quote and set up deserves some additional thought into the ideas and power structures described by Lynne Kelly in Knowledge and Power in Prehistoric Societies Orality, Memory and the Transmission of Culture

    2. There’s a way of thinking about data – and about how we use the linked technologies to connect, communicate and organise – that grows out of the seven generations view KSR talks about in TMFTF. It’s something that serves us, and which never stops being of us. It’s not an asset so much as a gift, but not all gifts can be given or received by all people. Once you start thinking of it this way, you can never go back.

      Not delineated directly here, but the idea of a seven generations view sounds intriguing.

    1. The scrapbooks reveal a critical and analytical way of thinking and emphasis on experimental evidence in physics, through which he became one of the early founders and advocates of modern scientific methodology. The more experience and experiments are accumulated during the exploration of nature, the more faltering its theories become. It is always good though not to abandon them instantly. For every hypothesis which used to be good at least serves the purpose of duly summarizing and keeping all phenomena until its own time. One should lay down the conflicting experience separately, until it has accumulated sufficiently to justify the efforts necessary to edifice a new theory. (Lichtenberg: scrapbook JII/1602)

      Georg Christoph Lichtenberg used his notebooks as thinking tools with respect to scientific methodology.

    1. Just because there can be issues with CSS in HTML emails doesn’t mean you should abandon efforts to use it. It all comes down to determining which codes are absolutely needed and how to style them so they can be rendered by email platforms.
  8. Apr 2021
    1. The main difference is in the flow of how messages are ultimately sent to devices for output. The standard library Logger logic converts the log entries to strings and then sends the string to the device to be written to a stream. Lumberjack, on the other hand, sends structured data in the form of a Lumberjack::LogEntry to the device and lets the device worry about how to format it. The reason for this flip is to better support structured data logging. Devices (even ones that write to streams) can format the entire payload including non-string objects and tags however they need to.
    1. The four C’s of 21st Century skills are: Critical thinking Creativity Collaboration Communication

      Convenient to have these four share an initial. (My perception is that a tendency to emphasize this type of parallelism has been strengthening over the years. At least, I don't recall this practice being common in French when I grew up.)

    1. Actually, I think your wife's point is quite astute. Once you become very familiar with this game, there is almost too much deep planning in the moves.
  9. Mar 2021
    1. Visible spectrum wrapped to join blue and green in an additive mixture of cyan

      the rainbow as a continuous (repeating) circle instead of semicircle

    1. Mutually exclusive categories can be beneficial. If categories appear several places, it's called cross-listing or polyhierarchical. The hierarchy will lose its value if cross-listing appears too often. Cross-listing often appears when working with ambiguous categories that fits more than one place.
    2. Two of the predominant types of relationships in knowledge-representation systems are predication and the universally quantified conditional.
    1. Finally, any approach to evidence-based man-agement should ensure that the practices suit theindustry and functional context. For example,professionals in a biotechnology company would beexpected to follow and use industry-appropriateevidence-based practices that are likely to bemore rigorous and extensive than those adopted bya fashion-clothing company. Such practices includeencouraging or even requiring their employees todo the following four things (seePfeffer & Sutton,2006): (1) demand evidence for statements thatseem implausible; (2) examine the logic or cause-and-effect reasoning between the evidence andthe statement; (3) as needed, encourage experi-mentation to test the confidence of data and val-idity of statements; and (4) continually repeat andbuild on the first three activities to create anevidence-based learning culture that stifles theproduction and spread of bullshit.
    2. Furthermore, to help encourage and value evi-dence over opinion, managers should be carefulwhom they consult. While they should seek sub-stantive debate about statements and supportingevidence, they should only involve well-informedand value-adding experts. Social media andcrowdsourcing initiatives regularly remind us thatthe wisdom of the crowd is not as judicious as wethink.
    3. Colleagues throughout the organization, andespecially those in administrative and leadershiproles, should also practice it so that evidence canguide key decisions. This is also true in the areas ofmarketing and sales, which thrive on the creationand circulation of bullshit.

      Bill Hicks would have approved of this.

    4. Research byPennycook, Cheyne, Barr, Koehler,and Fugelsang (2015)suggests that an organiza-tion’s capacity to produce and accept workplacebullshit decreases with the prevalence of andvalue placed on critical thinking in that organiza-tion. They outline how individuals have differentsensitivities to bullshit: Those who have the abilityto stop and think analytically about the substanceof statements are less receptive to bullshit, whilethose with lower cognitive skills and less insightare more receptive.

      This is why workplaces must encourage and maintain critical thinking.

    5. What people think and state depends on how theythink. Thus, it is far more dangerous to assumepeople know what they are talking about than it isto assume they do not
  10. Feb 2021
    1. And a word of warning. If you haven’t come across things like monads before, they might seem really… different. Working with tools like these takes a mind shift. And that can be hard work to start with.
    1. a framework containing the basic assumptions, ways of thinking, and methodology that are commonly accepted by members of a scientific community. such a cognitive framework shared by members of any discipline or group:
    1. Dr. Jeremy Dean, VP of Education at Hypothesis says, “I’m especially excited about this project because it brings my work in social annotation back to its origins. I first discovered this technology while teaching composition at UT Austin. I’ve long engaged my students in social annotation, knowing from my own experience that it builds their critical reading and writing skills. With this study, we’ll be able to explore if what I’ve seen happen in my classes plays out at scale: Do students who annotate become better readers, and therefore, better thinkers and writers?”

      I might suggest that this is moving in the right direction, but I would posit that annotation is only the beginning of the process of working with/conversing with texts.

      What happens after the annotation? Can students revisit them easily? Search for them? Can they move their annotations around? Connect them in new and interesting ways?

      These practices may require more flexibility with their Hypothes.is data to reuse and remix it.

    1. class FormsController < ApplicationController class SearchForm < ActiveModel::Form

      I kind of like how they put the form class nested directly inside the controller, although I would probably put it in its own file myself, unless it was quite trivial.

    1. This column and last month's article are about design. Design, by nature, is a series of trade-offs. Every choice has a good and bad side, and you make your choice in the context of overall criteria defined by necessity. Good and bad are not absolutes, however. A good decision in one context might be bad in another.
    2. This article explains why you shouldn't use getters and setters (and when you can use them) and suggests a design methodology that will help you break out of the getter/setter mentality.
    1. Locke’s method proved so popular that a century later, an enterprising publisher named John Bell printed a notebook entitled: “Bell’s Common-Place Book, Formed generally upon the Principles Recommended and Practised by Mr Locke.” Put another way, Bell created a commonplace book by commonplacing someone else’s technique for maintaining a commonplace book. The book included eight pages of instructions on Locke’s indexing method, a system which not only made it easier to find passages, but also served the higher purpose of “facilitat[ing] reflexive thought.”

      This concept here is an interesting one of being "meta".

    1. Sharpe claims that Englishmen “were able to…constitute themselves as political agents” by reading, whether or not they read about state affairs; for politics was “a type of consciousness” and the psyche “a text of politics.” “The Civil War itself became a contested text.” So reading was everything: “We are what we read.”

      The argument here is that much of the English Civil War was waged in reading and writing. Compare this with today's similar political civil war between the right and the left, but it is being waged in social media instead in sound bites, video clips, tweets, which encourage visceral gut reactions instead of longer and better thought out arguments and well tempered reactions.

      Instead of moving forward on the axis of thought and rationality, we're descending instead into the primordial and visceral reactions of our "reptilian brains."

    1. Conversation around Adam Grant's Think Again.

      • Task Conflict vs Relationship Conflict
      • The absence of conflict is not harmony; it is apathy
      • Beliefs vs Values; what you think is true vs what you think is important. Be open around beliefs; be committed to values.
      • Preachers, Prosecutors, Politicians... and Scientists: defend or beliefs, prove the others wrong, seek approval and be liked... hypothesize and experiment.
      • Support Network... and a Challenge Network. (Can we force ourselves to have a Challenge Network by using the Six Thinking Hats?)
      • Awaken curiosity (your own, and other's to help them change their mind)
      • Successful negotiators spend more time looking for common ground and asking questions to understand
      • Solution Aversion: someone rejecting a proposed solution may end up rejecting the existence of the problem itself (e.g. climate change)
  11. parsejournal.com parsejournal.com
    1. non-representationalist understanding of thinking as proposed by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari in their What is Philosophy? (1994). Point of connection is the notion of mise en scène
    2. contemporary performances and installations as examples of thinking understood as a distributed practice
    1. From addiction and weight-loss psychologists, he borrowed a technique called motivational interviewing, in which a counselor asks questions, like a less abrasive Socrates, helping the counseled examine their own uncertainties. From his French pediatrician colleagues, he borrowed the notion of staging such conversations in the maternity ward, within a day of a baby’s birth.

      Bingo! Just like what [[Adam Grant]] mentioned: motivational interviewing.

    2. As a neonatologist from the north of France, an M.D.-Ph.D., and a speaker of clipped European French in a province of slurred consonants, he might’ve come across as slightly snooty. His attitude, though, was anything but. As he prepared to talk vaccines with Étienne-Rousseau — a hardliner, he’d been told — he purposefully set his expert opinions aside. Too often, he felt, doctors try to think on behalf of their patients and alienate them in the process. He hoped he could avoid that trap. “I didn’t want to put any pressure on her,” he said.

      This is related to an article by [[Adam Grant]] on his new book: Think Again.

    1. According to the journalist David Epstein, author of Range, our obsession with specialization has infiltrated the ranks of youth sports coaches and helicopter parents, and it defies logic. Unless your job requires repetitive, routine tasks, being a specialist isn’t an asset. Having a wide range of skills and experiences is more beneficial because it allows you to be nimble and creative.

      I wonder if being a surgeon classified as requiring repetitive, routine tasks? Then being a specialist is an asset.

  12. Jan 2021
    1. Introduce students to the “explode to explain” strategy. When students “explode to explain,” they closely read a key sentence or two in a source, annotate, and practice explaining what they are thinking and learning.

      This is a specific strategy to include in an active reading session.

    1. Was den Aberglauben der Logiker betrifft: so will ich nicht müde werden, eine kleine kurze Thatsache immer wieder zu unterstreichen, welche von diesen Abergläubischen ungern zugestanden wird, — nämlich, dass ein Gedanke kommt, wenn „er“ will, und nicht wenn „ich“ will; so dass es eine Fälschung des Thatbestandes ist, zu sagen: das Subjekt „ich“ ist die Bedingung des Prädikats „denke“. Es denkt: aber dass dies „es“ gerade jenes alte berühmte „Ich“ sei, ist, milde geredet, nur eine Annahme, eine Behauptung, vor Allem keine „unmittelbare Gewissheit“. Zuletzt ist schon mit diesem „es denkt“ zu viel gethan: schon dies „es“ enthält eine Auslegung des Vorgangs und gehört nicht zum Vorgange selbst. Man schliesst hier nach der grammatischen Gewohnheit „Denken ist eine Thätigkeit, zu jeder Thätigkeit gehört Einer, der thätig ist, folglich —“. Ungefähr nach dem gleichen Schema suchte die ältere Atomistik zu der „Kraft“, die wirkt, noch jenes Klümpchen Materie, worin sie sitzt, aus der heraus sie wirkt, das Atom; strengere Köpfe lernten endlich ohne diesen „Erdenrest“ auskommen, und vielleicht gewöhnt man sich eines Tages noch daran, auch seitens der Logiker ohne jenes kleine „es“ (zu dem sich das ehrliche alte Ich verflüchtigt hat) auszukommen.

      It is impossible to say that "I think". The only thing one can say is that "something thinks"

    1. τοῦτο γὰρ λαβεῖν μὲν ἀναγκαῖον, οὐ ῥᾴδιον δέ. φαίνεται δὲ τῶν μὲν πλείστων οὐθὲν ἄνευ τοῦ σώματος πάσχειν οὐδὲ ποιεῖν, οἷον ὀργίζεσθαι, θαρρεῖν, ἐπιθυμεῖν, ὅλως αἰσθάνεσθαι, μάλιστα δ' ἔοικεν ἰδίῳ τὸ νοεῖν· εἰ δ' ἐστὶ καὶ τοῦτο φαντασία τις ἢ μὴ ἄνευ φαντασίας, οὐκ ἐνδέχοιτ' ἂν οὐδὲ τοῦτ' ἄνευ σώματος εἶναι.

      thinking without body