Category Archives: 42

42 Concepts & Metaphors

If concepts are seen as isolated/ atomic representations that can be computationally manipulated, a lot of meaning is missed, which might rather be found in whole sets of connectors drawn between different words’ senses.

Bates vs. Downes

Connectivism is difficult to understand without the level of ‘concepts’. Of course concepts are just folk psychology, but this can serve as ‘shorthand’.
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Learning | Leave a comment

Anthropomorphic misdirection

Anthropomorphic speak to communicate about what the computer “knows” or “thinks” can be perfectly ok. But there are problematic areas. One is deep machine learning, where such terms dangerously blur the border between reality and science fiction. Another one is McGilchrist’s “Master and Emissary” for the two brain hemispheres.
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Cognitive Styles | Tagged | Leave a comment

Spatial word roots are most prolific

If you stroll around the word roots on my map, you may notice that the category #3, “Space, Position, Form”, shows particularly many items in this selection of the top 300 most prolific roots, i.e. the ones that have inspired the most new words. So what does it mean that spatial concepts were so prolific?
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Multimedia and Language | Tagged | 6 Comments

Conceptual Connections, once again

I am still wondering if conceptual connections would fulfill one of Stephen Downes’ criteria: “A connection exists between two entities when a change of state in one entity can cause or result in a change of state in the second entity.” Words can change each other’s subtle nuances; “Language is use”,
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Knowledge | 8 Comments

Atomic concepts?

“Measure learning outcomes at the atomic concept level” sounds strange.

Continue reading

Posted in 42, Learning | Leave a comment

Raft of Concepts

The metaphor of a raft visualizes that concepts are not merely nodes on a concept map, not abstract-symbolic dots or neat circles, but that connections between them play a crucial role. Continue reading

Posted in 42, Knowledge | Leave a comment

Conceptual layer, again

The good news is, that the conceptual layer of connectivism is still alive: George just showed this slide at SUNYSB But the disappointing thing about it is that it looks very pale. George likened it to Google’s “Knowledge Graph” (approx. … Continue reading

Posted in 42, Visualization | Leave a comment

Connections “beyond” concepts?

With concept maps, “the problem is that you’re tied to the sign, word and symbol.” (Stephen). So I am still grappling with the connections between (or within, or “beyond”?) concepts. Unlike Cmaps, the brain is not filled with propositions. But perhaps we should simply let go the traditional roles of nodes and connector lines, and find the ideas in sets of connectors?
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Visualization | 2 Comments

Concepts not nodes

In an interesting discussion between G. Siemens and S. Downes, they are addressing “knowledge elements”, concepts, nodes in the network, and entities. I am trying to understand the issues by looking at the “ports” of the network nodes.
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Knowledge management | 3 Comments

Concepts of concepts

Stimulated by D. Grey’s detailed posting “On the concept of a concept”, I tried to depict my view of concepts.
Continue reading

Posted in 42, Multimedia and Language | Leave a comment