I previously wrote 3 blog posts connecting some concepts and this blog post is purposed for connecting all of those concepts plus one additional one. The concepts are: integration, knowledge-creation, self-evaluation, libraries of criticism, overreaching, fallibility.
Brainstorming:
- What do the concepts mean?
- Knowledge-creation: Knowledge-creation is about how learning works, how problem-solving works, how decision-making works, etc.
- Self-evaluation: Self-evaluation means evaluating ideas yourself.
- Overreaching: Overreaching means your error-correction rate is being overwhelmed by your error-producing rate.
- Integration: Integration means building up relatively complex ideas from relatively simpler ideas.
- Fallibility: Fallibility says people can make mistakes and that it's super common.
- Libraries of criticism: A library of criticism is a set of criticisms that you know that you can use to refute some ideas.
- How are the concepts connected?
- Knowledge-creation and fallibility: Knowledge-creation depends on fallibility. If I have a policy for dealing with ideas that does not account for the possibility that an idea is wrong, then I'm failing to create knowledge.
- Knowledge-creation and integration: Knowledge-creation requires integration. Integration allows you to use principles in your thinking. Thinking without using principles as a guide doesn't work.
- Knowledge-creation, self-evaluation, and fallibility: Knowledge-creation requires self-evaluation. I can't rely on other people to evaluate my ideas.
- Why can't I rely on other people to evaluate my ideas for me? Two reasons:
- Reason: That person could be wrong, due to fallibility, and since I don't know how to self-evaluate, I won't be able to know if that person's idea is wrong or not.
- Reason: Even if that person's idea is right, the expected result is that I won't understand it and won't even know that I failed to understand it. So if I thought I understood it and followed it, and if I didn't actually understanding it, then I will have adopted an idea that wasn't the idea that I was given. So I'd be effectively following an idea by blind faith.
- Knowledge-creation and overreaching: If you're overreaching, you're failing to create knowledge. Why? Because you're making more mistakes than you're correcting, leaving tons of uncorrected mistakes.
- Overreaching and fallibility: When I am overreaching, that means I'm not accounting for fallibility.
- Overreaching and integration:
- If you're overreaching, you won't be able to integrate your ideas well.
- The more you integrate your ideas, the more universal your ideas/skills/policies will be, allowing you to do more complex things without overreaching.
- Self-evaluation and overreaching:
- If you're unable to adequately self-evaluate some ideas, then dealing with those ideas (using them in your thinking or discussion) is overreaching.
- The more you improve your self-evaluation processes, the more complex ideas you can deal with without overreaching.
- Self-evaluation and integration: If you are unable to self-evaluate some ideas, you won't be able to integrate them well.
- Knowledge-creation and library of criticism: Knowledge-creation requires criticism and it works better when you reuse already known criticisms. The already known criticisms are libraries of criticism.
- Self-evaluation and libraries of criticism: In order to adequately self-evaluate some ideas, you'd have to have an appropriate library of criticism for those ideas.
- Overreaching and libraries of criticism: If you're doing an activity and it's overreaching for you, that means you haven't built up an appropriate library of criticism for that activity.
- Fallibility and libraries of criticism: If you're not trying to create libraries of criticism, then you're not accounting for fallibility.
- Integration and fallibility: Integrating ideas helps you account for fallibility because it makes it easier to recognize contradictions between ideas (which are a type of mistake).
- Integration and libraries of criticism:
- Having appropriate libraries of criticism for some ideas allows you to integrate them well.
- Even the process of integration requires an appropriate library of criticism for that activity.
Process I used as a guide to make the content above
Note: I used my general process of writing blog posts as a guide to create the following process:
- Document the goals with clear success/failure criteria
- Goal: State audience. Be specific enough that I could use the model to make predictions about whether the audience will understand my statements.
- For this blog post, the audience is me and some FI veterans that might read this and provide me criticism.
- Goal: Avoid misrepresenting other people's ideas (in content and credit)
- Goal: connect the following concepts -- integration, knowledge creation, self-evaluation, library of criticism, overreaching
- Reread Elliot's Using Questions in Thinking once before writing the content and once afterwards to check for things I forgot, and edit if necessary.
- Write the content.
- After writing the body
- make a good summary
- make a good title
- Analyze whether or not I met the goals.
Analysis
- Did I adequately define the audience? Yes. I'm able to use my audience model to self-evaluate whether or not my audience will understand my statements.
- Did I avoid misrepresenting other people's ideas both in content and credit?
- Content: Yes. I indicated that I'm only brainstorming, which implies that I'm not claiming that my versions of the original ideas are fully compatible with the original ideas.
- Credit: Yes. I provided links to the original ideas that I worked with, which clearly indicates to my audience that my ideas are versions of originals. So I'm giving credit to the author(s) of the originals.
- Did I connect all of the ideas that I intended to connect? Yes. I made a spreadsheet to connect every two-idea combination of the original ideas, and I made sure that my blog post includes every two-idea combination. Using this process helped me find 2 combinations that I missed, and then I corrected that.
- Did I make a good summary? Yes. I wrote the first summary early in my process of writing the main content (not at the beginning), and then I edited it a couple of times during the process of writing the main content.
- Did I make a good title? Yes. I wrote it before my process of writing the main content, and also before documenting the process that I would follow for making and analyzing the main content. Then I edited the title a couple of times during the process of writing the main content.
No comments:
Post a Comment