Increasingly curious as to why the tools-for-thought folk talk a lot about note-taking tool features and plugins and not at all about the cognitive science of better externalised thinking.
29
27
221
Conversation
Replying to
Per Alan Kay, it's a pop culture; for the most part, people aren't engaging deeply with the problem.
(separately, though I think the former is the true reason: I'm not optimistic that current cogsci theories about this particular topic present many powerful ideas)
Replying to
I’ll send you an email next week with a summary of a body of work I’m currently digging into.
I’m still writing it, but there’s apparently 40 years of research + hypermedia implementation of learning systems in ill-structured domains.
5
15
Some hints here:
Quote Tweet
Also relevant (though this one demands some understanding of cognitive flexibility theory, and why learning in ill-structured domains is markedly different from structured domains): citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/downlo
Show this thread
1
1
Show replies
Better can be a whole requisite variety of different things. Pop, cogsci, spatial thinking eg a la Barbara Tversky, Tufte and insights around design, text and presentations, ...
Very much this, cog sci has a lot to say about brain processing and less to say about thinking as we think of it. (I’m reading a lot at the moment on my way to writing a book about thinking)
2
1
In passing, part of the problem with TFT is that it's very interested in the activity of "learning" and much less interested in "thinking."
1