- Snake oil serendipity? | x28's new Blog on Magic of Zettelkasten
- Import from Roam – Thought condensr on Automagical links?
- Automagical links? | x28's new Blog on Inspiring or distracting?
- Tinderbox import – Thought condensr on Inspiring or distracting?
- Inspiring or distracting? | x28's new Blog on Top ten tools
- About Links (6)
- CCK08 (30)
- CCK11 (5)
- CCK12 (1)
- change11 (15)
- Classification (8)
- Cognitive Styles (39)
- CritLit2010 (3)
- DALMOOC (3)
- E-resonance (2)
- EL30 (18)
- eLearning (8)
- Hypertext (4)
- Intuition (1)
- Knowledge (17)
- Knowledge management (17)
- Learning (19)
- Misc (9)
- Multimedia and Dictionaries (2)
- Multimedia and Encyclopaedias (3)
- Multimedia and Language (14)
- NRC01PL (2)
- OpenEdMOOC (6)
- OpenLearning19 (4)
- Personal Productivity (31)
- PIM (25)
- PLENK2010 (12)
- rhizo14 (9)
- Social software (11)
- Tools (1)
- Uncategorized (3)
- Usability (4)
- Visualization (40)
- Web (3)
Category Archives: Cognitive Styles
This great book on Perspectives of Agility (in German) was written over the weekend in an agile book sprint by a group in Karlsruhe, and I am following their invitation to ask ‘agile’ questions. So: How can agile methods cater … Continue reading
In my view, McGilchrist’s “Master” and “Emissary” modes are the mind’s equivalent of what bending and stretching are for the body. So we need to understand the ‘flexors’ and ‘extensors’ of brain operation.
Why is the denial of brain lateralization so grim, piqued and emotional? The very idea that there are different modes, may be unsettling. The complacency that there is just one right way (and of course this is mine) may be threatened. Furthermore, the notion of two hemispheres suggests that the two modes are equitable.
In a very inspiring paper, R. Williams, S. Gumtau and J. Mackness offer much insights about a wide spectrum of the cognitive development. It appears very clear and suggests how all the pieces fit together: From embodied cognition, synesthetic abilities, metaphors, to generalizations and abstractions.
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.
Today’s OLDaily points to a paean of abstraction. I wonder if it is really useful to glorify the abstract in this radical, literal, narrow (well: abstract) sense, or if we are conflating it with other forms of generalizations or indirections, such as patterns or metaphors.
In a new article on Learning Styles, the old black and white thinking is reiterated: Approaches are wrong because there is no evidence. But also critics with more differentiated views have their say, who advise teachers “to become aware of their own learning style”.
While both bloggers and forum lovers on CCK08 value diverse, non-linear, “big picture” style conversations, there might be subtle differences in the type of conceptual connections that both camps feel most comfortable with. This differences affect the “closeness” or “nearness” of the concepts, ideas, and aspects under discussion, both “spatially” and temporally.
Never before I have seen such a vivid visualization of the concept of “facts” as in the Flickr set “Free the Facts”. It employs some simplification but I think it is legitimate and credible.