Arg, I should have added: Information science <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_science>
Not just in the sense of "how do we record information/thoughts", but also how do these ways of recording impact our way of thinking? For me, I see everything as connected directly of within only a few degrees of separation. And new connections happen all of the time in an organic/evolutionary way. That might explain why a wiki is my go-to solution almost every time because a wiki has that ability to handle all of the "intertwingularity" and to rapidly adapt (add new information, add new structures, evolve information and structures ...) Many moons ago, I new an executive that did everything, no matter what, in spreadsheets. Kind of a chicken and egg problem: is it the tool that impacts thinking, or is thinking that impacts choice of tool. Oops, SQUIRREL ! On Saturday, October 31, 2020 at 2:30:29 PM UTC-3 Charlie Veniot wrote: > If I may stand tall on si's shoulders ... > > I'm thinking, as you dig into cognitive science, that there are a ton of > overlapping and (to me) wildly interesting topics that compliment each > other. > > For example, (I like to think of these as all under and/or linked to si's > great catch-all of cognitive science): > > - Cognitive psychology > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_psychology#:~:text=Cognitive%20psychology%20is%20the%20scientific,%2C%20creativity%2C%20and%20thinking%22.> > - Problem solving > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_solving#Cognitive_sciences> > - Cognitive load <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_load> > - Information overload > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_overload> > - Disabilities affecting intellectual abilities > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disabilities_affecting_intellectual_abilities> > - Fight-or-flight response > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight-or-flight_response> > - Instinct <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct> > - Experience <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience> > - Causality <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality> > - Philosophy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy> > - Information Mapping > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_mapping> *(well, not the > specific methodology, but rather in general approaches to > organising thoughts)* > - etc. etc. ad infinitum ad *(well, the opposite to me because of an > insatiable appetite for this kind of stuff)* nauseam > > > There are so many things that can impact how each individual's thinking > processes. Stuff that makes the human species pretty interesting. > > Fun post, bimlas ! > > On Saturday, October 31, 2020 at 11:39:38 AM UTC-3 si wrote: > >> These encouraged me to think about the process of thinking itself. Is >>> there a science of thoughts? Would that be the philosophy? >>> >> >> I think this would fall under cognitive science >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science>. I believe that we >> refer to the process of 'thinking about thinking' as metacognition >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition>. >> >> I'm not well informed enough to give you any real info, but I am also >> fascinated with understanding how we think. Partly because it's just >> inherently interesting, but also because, as you say, it can help us to >> build tools that interact with out mind in a way that makes us more >> effective thinkers. >> >> I aspire to learn more about this topic in the future, but for now I just >> rely on a very fractured and low-resolution understanding to help me make >> some sense of how my mind works with regards to learning and creativity. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/0bd2518d-dc88-4446-bdb4-a3a5d119d019n%40googlegroups.com.
