I was briefly musing what is the stuff of thought, the other day. Got me thinking also, when going through Justin Sung going through three levels of mind maps, about what is our preferred or optimal way of consuming information?
Justin talks about how linear note taking is a waste of time because you can't really "see" the information, whereas mind maps have a kind of clear flow between concepts and groups of concepts. And some connections are strong while others are weak.
Just for fun, maybe I can describe the above in a mind map ?
But we publish books not mind maps 🤔
I definitely "see" associations between concepts faster, in a mind map, like above, but there's definitely something there to how we read magazine articles and not magazine mind maps.
Why is it that we like stories so much?
3 levels of blah
So they say there's, "data", which is just raw unfiltered, unstructured stuff. Then you can add some structure to it and create facts about the world and that is "information" . Reading in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIKW_pyramid on this a bit, so then "knowledge" is sort of ordered information.
That wiki post has this incredible quote,
"All knowledge is tacit"
which is to say knowledge is difficult to transfer from one person to another. (Sorry Neo, Morpheus and Matrix)
Thats the whole point isn't it? Thats why Martin Fowler I recall says, in that in organizations, "architecture" (which is a kind of knowledge about software systems), exists in the conversations between people. And any attempt at "drawing architecture diagrams" is temporary at best , but usually misleading or incomplete.
Wow if the above is true, basically all all of "knowledge management" (like any "management" really 😆😉) is a subjective illusion.
