Powerful tools for thought usually arise as a byproduct of real work in a field rather than "I have an idea for a tool!" (Hindu-Arabic numerals, microscopes, RenderMan, Mathematica). => People interested in tools must get into a context s.t. real work incites tool-work. Not easy!
Conversation
Replying to
Sharing a short essay about my struggles with this tension, "Finding research–context fit": patreon.com/posts/finding-
I published this for patrons in May, making public today. I've made some progress here in the past few months, but not enough—if you have ideas, please holler/DM!
2
1
40
Replying to
But are there ways to make the tool you invented during work into something more generally useful?
1
1
That was the path of all the examples I mentioned, as well as many other very powerful tools for thought!
1
3
Show replies
Replying to
What are some practices that help discover these ideas for tools? Just work and jot down the ideas as they come?
2
2
I’d think the iterative approach should work (start with stuff that already exists, then look out for itches + build capacity to build tools). Itch == idea + at least one user/context of use (you)
1
2
Show replies
Replying to
I wonder if you’ve considered seeing it from a different angle: improving students’ tools instead of teachers’ tools.
1
2
Spent many years trying! Now I don't find the student/teacher dichotomy very interesting—but I do think the low-/high-investment/skill augmentation dichotomy is really meaningful.
1
2
Show replies
At the moment, I'm using it to study cognitive psychology and design, and to help me learn about my own research concepts. As far as teach—nothing's felt compelling enough yet. It's a problem for my current work that I'm not that intrinsically excited by teaching/explaining.
2
6
Show replies
Replying to
I see this through a genealogical perspective: if someone is interested in computing as a new medium, ask them how they got there.
It it's to unfrustrate themselves because they need something to do what they couldn't do => good sign.