There's lots of enthusiasm for tools for thought, but one big problem is that efforts often don't meaningfully accrete. In this post I sketch what may be needed to make progress in a ratcheting fashion.
(published patron-only in February; made public now)
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Hm, interesting. I guess I don't feel that a missing shared definition is a problem! Is there something in particular (other than the archaic "man") you find outdated in Engelbart's '62 definition?
Regarding the article: I gave you feedback about this one on our video chat a couple months back! :)
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
That definition has limitations and is certainly worth improving, but I think it's good enough that it's not a meaningful bottleneck in terms of organizing the field.
1