Forum Posts Feed
short time memory and outliner software
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Guido
Mar 26, 2008 at 08:42 AM
That is because we don’t seperate here between thinking how it can be and how it should be. Every thougt can be in theory connected to every other thought, but in terms of good scholar thinking that should not be so. Even if hyperlinks can be useful, one should be aware that hyperlinks are not necessarily translated into meaningful connections between thoughts by your brain ( my main argument against the wiki approach of connected text ).
Posted by Cassius
Mar 26, 2008 at 01:32 PM
Guido wrote:
>That is because we don’t seperate here between thinking how it can be and how it should
>be. Every thougt can be in theory connected to every other thought, but in terms of good
>scholar thinking that should not be so. Even if hyperlinks can be useful, one should be
>aware that hyperlinks are not necessarily translated into meaningful connections
>between thoughts by your brain ( my main argument against the wiki approach of
>connected text ).
I agree completely! That is why one should be careful and “stingy/minimalist” in creating hyperlinks. I, too, fear to use the wiki approach for the same reason. Of course, some might say that wikis or an abundance of hyperlinks might support “thinking outside the box,” but I doubt it.
Speaking of “thinking outside the box,” here is a recent, marvelous quote by Warren Buffett:
“I’ve reluctantly discarded the notion of my continuing to manage the portfolio after my death - abandoning my hope to give new meaning to the term ‘thinking outside the box.’”
—Warren Buffett on his eventual passing and new management of Berkshire Hathaway, 2/29/08
-c
Posted by Chris Thompson
Mar 26, 2008 at 03:47 PM
From the little I’ve read, Buzan was a believer in the idea that arbitrary connections between items didn’t really correspond with how people actually think. His thesis was that people think mostly in terms of hierarchies (outlines) but can benefit from some spatial information added to those hierarchies.
I think he’s probably right. The human mental instinct to think in terms of hierarchies is very strong. It seems to be related to our instinct for pattern recognition. Arbitrary collections of links seem foreign.
You see this everywhere. Programmers instinctively lean towards tree controls in their user interfaces. Doctors prefer the concept of a hierarchical “differential diagnosis” over Bayesian reasoning, etc.
—Chris
Posted by Stephen Zeoli
Mar 26, 2008 at 09:00 PM
I am far from an expert on memory or learning, but I’d still like to throw in my thoughts on this subject.
First of all, I am uncertain of the value in worrying about short-term memory. That’s not learning or understanding. It enters our minds for a short time then goes away. As it should.
Isn’t it long-term memory and understanding that we are talking about here? Or am I missing something? —entirely possible.
Learning and even long-term memory is about context. When I understand the context of something, I am more likely to remember it and to “get it.” Of course, context can come in many shapes and sizes. For instance, if I wanted to learn about the planets of our solar system, I could think of them by their distance from the sun, or by their relative sizes, or by the type of atmosphere each may have. In fact, I’d like to have all this information about each of them available… A program like MyInfo would allow me to build a list of the planets with columnar meta data on each of the three characteristics I listed above. Then I could sort them by any of those characteristics. I don’t believe I would be able to view a mind map of the planets in the same way—that is with different contexts.
Steve Z.
Posted by quant
Mar 26, 2008 at 10:20 PM
I agree with Steve, the most important thing is to understand first, before you try to learn sth.
The problem is when there isn’t much to “understand”, and one has to purely memorize things, sets, ...
In fact, it’s quite interesting that when one has to learn a “set of information”, it is easier to remember the “ordered set”, which in fact contains more information than the unordered set. Like the example with planets in our solar system, usually people learn them ordered by the distance from the Sun.
When building my knowledge base, I often consult the SuperMemo website, the articles on memory and knowledge management are excellent, http://www.supermemo.com/