Narrow vs broad cognitive augmentation - Revision history

Issa at 19:56, 5 November 2021

2021-11-05T19:56:42Z

Issa at 19:56, 5 November 2021

2021-11-05T19:56:23Z

Issa at 18:34, 14 August 2021

2021-08-14T18:34:26Z

Issa at 00:42, 17 July 2021

2021-07-17T00:42:44Z

Issa at 22:03, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T22:03:42Z

Issa at 21:07, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T21:07:57Z

Issa at 21:03, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T21:03:23Z

Issa at 21:02, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T21:02:36Z

Issa at 21:02, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T21:02:12Z

Issa at 21:00, 30 March 2021

2021-03-30T21:00:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:56, 5 November 2021
Line 19:		Line 19:

	{{Special:WhatLinksHere/{{FULLPAGENAME}} \| hideredirects=1}}		{{Special:WhatLinksHere/{{FULLPAGENAME}} \| hideredirects=1}}
		+
		+	==References==
		+
		+	<references/>

	[[Category:Learning]]		[[Category:Learning]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:56, 5 November 2021
Line 9:		Line 9:

	The kind of visualization work that [[3blue1brown]] does feels like kind of a mix. On one hand, visualization itself feels like a broad augmentation. But on the other hand, Grant has to create a separate video for each thing he wants to explain. The audience doesn't know how to animate math concepts; they are just there to consume. So it's narrow too in that sense.		The kind of visualization work that [[3blue1brown]] does feels like kind of a mix. On one hand, visualization itself feels like a broad augmentation. But on the other hand, Grant has to create a separate video for each thing he wants to explain. The audience doesn't know how to animate math concepts; they are just there to consume. So it's narrow too in that sense.
		+
		+	[[Andy Matuschak]] talks about a similar distinction in "We can develop the mnemonic medium by writing about topics with only moderate domain expertise".<ref>https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z6LEquSV2snbPHMcZ1ViRNVpVqXUP6uJRq9sB</ref> In particular see quotes like, "If you’re developing an interface that gets its power by reifying deep ideas about a medium (like Logo), you need deep expertise in that medium to reify the right ideas. Papert didn’t have that. By contrast, the mnemonic medium primarily reifies ideas about memory, theory of knowledge, habits, etc—not ideas about quantum computing."

	==See also==		==See also==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:34, 14 August 2021
Line 7:		Line 7:

	A narrow augmentation is more satisfying to use, but inventing it still takes a lot of work and you must invent separate tools for every topic you want to think about.		A narrow augmentation is more satisfying to use, but inventing it still takes a lot of work and you must invent separate tools for every topic you want to think about.
		+
		+	The kind of visualization work that [[3blue1brown]] does feels like kind of a mix. On one hand, visualization itself feels like a broad augmentation. But on the other hand, Grant has to create a separate video for each thing he wants to explain. The audience doesn't know how to animate math concepts; they are just there to consume. So it's narrow too in that sense.

	==See also==		==See also==

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:42, 17 July 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:

	* [[Explorable explanation]] -- explorable explanations mainly focus on the narrow kind of augmentation		* [[Explorable explanation]] -- explorable explanations mainly focus on the narrow kind of augmentation
		+
		+	==What links here==
		+
		+	{{Special:WhatLinksHere/{{FULLPAGENAME}} \| hideredirects=1}}

	[[Category:Learning]]		[[Category:Learning]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Here is one axis I've been paying attention to when thinking about the question of "how to do we make people better at thinking?":
-* '''narrow/vertical/specialized''': This kind of augmentation looks at a concrete topic and tries to get at its "true nature", and then comes up with tools to help people think specifically about that topic. For instance, Arabic numerals look specifically at numbers, helping people manipulate and think about them. Sure, you might also learn some things about logarithms or Cauchy sequences by studying Arabic numerals, but mostly they only help you think about numbers, not about some completely unrelated topic like linear algebra. (I want to distinguish between how knowing the Arabic numerals helps you ''do'' linear algebra because of course you use numbers while doing linear algebra, which seems totally obvious to me, and Arabic numerals actually giving insight ''about'' linear algebra, which seems false to me.)
+* '''narrow/vertical/specialized''': This kind of augmentation looks at a concrete topic and tries to get at its "true nature", and then comes up with tools to help people think specifically about that topic. For instance, Arabic numerals look specifically at numbers, helping people manipulate and think about them. Sure, you might also learn some things about logarithms or sequences of real numbers by studying Arabic numerals, but mostly they only help you think about numbers, not about some completely unrelated topic like linear algebra. (I want to distinguish between how knowing the Arabic numerals helps you ''do'' linear algebra because of course you use numbers while doing linear algebra, which seems totally obvious to me, and Arabic numerals actually giving insight ''about'' linear algebra, which seems false to me.)
 * '''broad/horizontal/universal''': This kind of augmentation looks at ''learning in general'', and asks how we can come up with tools that help across a diverse variety of fields. For instance, [[spaced repetition]] or the invention of writing are good examples here. Spaced repetition helps you not only learn languages, but also any subfield of math, and chemistry, and physics, and on and on. There is nothing about spaced repetition that is specifically about, say, linear algebra; it's more that spaced repetition is a fact about how the human brain learns.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 * '''narrow/vertical/specialized''': This kind of augmentation looks at a concrete topic and tries to get at its "true nature", and then comes up with tools to help people think specifically about that topic. For instance, Arabic numerals look specifically at numbers, helping people manipulate and think about them. Sure, you might also learn some things about logarithms or Cauchy sequences by studying Arabic numerals, but mostly they only help you think about numbers, not about some completely unrelated topic like linear algebra. (I want to distinguish between how knowing the Arabic numerals helps you ''do'' linear algebra because of course you use numbers while doing linear algebra, which seems totally obvious to me, and Arabic numerals actually giving insight ''about'' linear algebra, which seems false to me.)
-* '''broad/horizontal/universal''': This kind of augmentation looks at ''learning in general'', and asks how we can come up with tools that help across a diverse variety of fields. For instance, spaced repetition or the invention of writing are good examples here. Spaced repetition helps you not only learn languages, but also any subfield of math, and chemistry, and physics, and on and on. There is nothing about spaced repetition that is specifically about, say, linear algebra; it's more that spaced repetition is a fact about how the human brain learns.
+* '''broad/horizontal/universal''': This kind of augmentation looks at ''learning in general'', and asks how we can come up with tools that help across a diverse variety of fields. For instance, [[spaced repetition]] or the invention of writing are good examples here. Spaced repetition helps you not only learn languages, but also any subfield of math, and chemistry, and physics, and on and on. There is nothing about spaced repetition that is specifically about, say, linear algebra; it's more that spaced repetition is a fact about how the human brain learns.
 [[Category:Learning]]