User:KYPark/Last


 * /2013

Symbology
The encoder encodes what is to be coded into the codes. Then the decoder decodes them hopefully back to the coded, however well the latter may fit the former.

Humanic Manifesto
The above diagram is to show, so to speak, the quadrant brain (qb) coding cycle, or &sub;qb&sup;. The left and right hemispheres thereof may well relate to symbolism and realism, respectively, vitally separated and bridged by truism.

Julian Jayne's bicameralism (1976) may be another, rather simpler mode of presentation, focusing on the upper and lower, the encoder and decoder, the "master" and "slave" hemispheres, also vitally separated and bridged by inter-subjectivity.

Symbolism, relying on coding or informing, is not so much trans-forming from code to code wholly explicitly or physically, on the "technical" level, as in-forming or making the implicit explicit logically, whether knowing or feeling, on the "semantic" and "pragmatic" levels. Hence, it is properly the cognitive rather than cognitivist, the humanic rather than dehumanizing or personalizing realm.

Claude Shannon's information theory (1948) basically has to do with the physical coding and recording, the carrier or container of information, but without regard to the logical content or meaning, whether feeling or learning. Hence, his radically partial notion of information and transformation from code to code, given and taken wholly explicitly, totally regardless of what is deeply and complicatedly implicated, that is, my invested interest! What an injustice his flood would do! What a fool, if not pirate, as well as hero his foolish followers may make of him!

A Category Mistake?
The innate or inherited capacity of learning, say, how to speak would better be distinguished from the acquired capability or knowledge of speaking, say, English.
 * Confusing Containers and Contents

The long-running arguments against the erased, blank slate or tabula rasa, especially ranging a half century from Noam Chomsky (1959) to Steven Pinker (2002), are too foolish to distinguish the container from the content of experience and learning. So are librarians more often than not, who used to mistake their books (containers under control) for "recorded knowledge" (contents under control). What a category mistake!

Why hypertext


The document retrieval system S is to predict the document(s) D most similar to the user enquiry E, and the user U is to discriminate the outcome.

As the one-to-one-scaled map is impractical and implausible, so may be the full text D for System-User communication S-U so that it used to be necessarily surrogated, say, into an abstract or a set of keywords d.

Nevertheless, such surrogates are mostly too rough for tough interpretation and evaluation enough to assure what the target document is all about.

Behind such blind surrogation, therefore, there must hide or entail such an alternative as "direct manipulation" (Shneiderman, 1983) of the full or partial text -- the criss-cross-referencing hypertext in particular!

And the "direct manipulation" or direct line of interaction S-D-U, would better give way to human-computer interaction (HCI), to be more informative.

Why second-order cybernetics










Overview
Any study, as of history, is to make it necessity. The better learned or informed, the better earned earnest of the future. Myths and miracles are unworthy. Then, Karl Popper's anti-historicism is wrong after all.

You are said to be as reasonable as seasonable, as rational as relational or empirical, as deductive as inductive, as analytic as synthetic. This is the very reason or motivation for learning, especially by experience and inference (or reflection, if you like), by inducing or integrating it into a coherent body, context, system, or structure of knowledge, whence you could deduce something at all.

1923 Ogden

 * See: 1923/Ogden

1930 Ogden

 * Basic English

1933 Korzybski

 * General semantics

1936 Richards

 * The Philosophy of Rhetoric

1938 Wells

 * From World Encyclopaedia (1936) to World Brain (1938) [q]

1939 Bernal

 * The Social Function of Science [q]

1940 Huxley

 * Words and Their Meanings [q]

A great deal of attention has been paid. . . to the technical languages in which men of science do their specialized thinking. . . . But the colloquial usages of everyday speech, the literary and philosophical dialects in which men do their thinking about the problems of morals, politics, religion and psychology -- these have been strangely neglected. We talk about "mere matters of words" in a tone which implies that we regard words as things beneath the notice of a serious-minded person.

This is a most unfortunate attitude. For the fact is that words play an enormous part in our lives and are therefore deserving of the closest study. The old idea that words possess magical powers is false; but its falsity is the distortion of a very important truth. Words do have a magical effect -- but not in the way that magicians supposed, and not on the objects they were trying to influence. Words are magical in the way they affect the minds of those who use them. "A mere matter of words," we say contemptuously, forgetting that words have power to mould men's thinking, to canalize their feeling, to direct their willing and acting. Conduct and character are largely determined by the nature of the words we currently use to discuss ourselves and the world around us.

-- Quoted as the opening passage of "BOOK ONE: The Functions of Language" (p. 3) of S. I. Hayakawa (1949). Language in Thought and Action.

1945 Bush

 * Category:As We May Think

1948 Shannon



 * General communication system?
 * Note how dehumanized this alleged "general communication system" is, as compared with.

1948 Wiener

 *  Cybernetics

The odors perceived by the ant seem to lead to a highly standardized course of conduct; but the value of a simple stimulus, such as an odor, for conveying information depends not only on the information conveyed by the stimulus itself but on the whole nervous constitution of the sender and receiver of the stimulus as well. Suppose I find myself in the woods with an intelligent savage who cannot speak my language and whose language I cannot speak. Even without any code of sign language common to the two of us, I can learn a great deal from him. All I need to do is to be alert to those moments when he shows the signs of emotion or interest. I then cast my eyes around, perhaps paying special attention to the direction of his glance, and fix in my memory what I see or hear. It will not be long before I discover the things which seem important to him, not because he has communicated them to me by language, but because I myself have observed them. In other words, a signal without an intrinsic content may acquire meaning in his mind by what he observes at the time, and may acquire meaning in my mind by what I observe at the time. The ability that he has to pick out the moments of my special, active attention is in itself a language as varied in possibilities as the range of impressions that the two of us are able to encompass. Thus social animals may have an active, intelligent, flexible means of communication long before the development of language.

(From VIII. Information, Language, and Society. p. 157.)

1957

 * The rise of Sputnik 1

1957 Cherry

 * On Human Communication criticizes Shannon's information theory.

1960 Quine

 * Word and Object

1975

 * Contextualist themes or memes '75
 * The rise of hacking and the fall of Saigon

Abraham A Linguistic Approach to Metaphor Buzan mind map Douglas Implicit Meanings Fodor Language of Thought Gadamer Truth and Method Galtung Peace Research Grice Implicature Leavis English as a Discipline of Thought Kochen From Knowledge to Wisdom Kolb Experiential Learning Lasswell informed politics Leavis English as a Discipline of Thought Lucas Why Information Systems Fail Luckmann Sociology of Language Merton Society for Social Studies of Science Norman Explorations in Cognition Pask Conversation, Cognition and Learning  Percy Delta Factor Piaget Language and Learning Pocock contextualism Polanyi Meaning  Putnam The Meaning of 'Meaning' Rayward The Universe of Information  Ricoeur The Rule of Metaphor Rumelhart human information processing Schank episode in memory Searle Indirect speech acts Sober Simplicity Sperber Rethinking Symbolism Suppes neobehaviorism Unger Knowledge and Politics  Wilson Sociobiology

1975 Kolb

 * Experiential learning


 * 1) concrete experience
 * 2) observation of and reflection on that experience
 * 3) formation of abstract concepts based upon the reflection
 * 4) testing the new concepts.

1976 Chisholm

 * Person and Object


 * See also
 * Ulric Neisser (1976). Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology. WH Freeman.
 * Willard Quine (1960). Word and Object.

1977

 * Concept mapping

1977 Popper
Popperian cosmology

1984
Simon Blackburn
 * Spreading the Word

This diagram looks like an interpretation or parody of, without reference made to, the seminal triangle of reference shown in Ogden & Richards (1923) The Meaning of Meaning.

The crux of their theory, as shown up in the triad, is that language makes no (magic of) meaning in itself or of itself, that is, without the user proper.

David Kolb
 * Experiential Learning


 * Note
 * The diagonal (originally orthogonal) yin and yang such as concrete - abstract, and active - reflective.
 * The explicit experiment - experience on the left, and the implicit observation - conception on the right.
 * The analogy to the speech act or turn-taking conversation with the speaker on top of the hearer.
 * The analogy to the (qb) model on top.

1986 Carr



 * Becoming Critical

1995 Nonaka



 * SECI Model

Hot spots

 * Maybe the hottest
 * An entry to easy cites et cetera
 * Others
 * Contextualism
 * World Brain
 * Basic English

Pages

 * 1923/Ogden/Summary

Wikimedia

 * Meetup/London/38





Wikipedia

 * New encyclopedism

Wikiquote

 * H. G. Wells
 * Language in Thought and Action

Wikiversity

 * 1929/Magritte, ie, -- An entry to a universe of meta-sources for enhancing creative, critical, cryptical thinking,  pragmatics or  significs over  symbolism in the sense of Ogden & Richards (1923).
 * World Brain
 * Colloquium/2010/Talkativeness

Wiktionary

 * wiktionary: User talk:KYPark