I appreciated Weinberger’s candid and accessible tone (I got a kick out of his asides: “The silverware basket is too damn miscellaneous” on pg. 84 or “Yes, it’s the world’s worst title” on pg. 80). His perspective about knowledge and order are very unique and refreshing. I also appreciate how he brings very specific examples to anchor his very abstract ideas. He doesn’t just talk about the weaknesses of the second order of order, he recounts, in detail, the history of Melvil Dewey and his system of categorizing.
The part that I found most interesting in these chapters was when he was talking about the periodic table of elements. When he was describing how the Periodic Table of Elements works, I kept waiting for him to contrast it to a more effective digital version. He comes to the conclusion, though, that the periodic table of elements contains intrinsically valuable information in its own layout. He seemed to find it as an exception to the inevitable and fitting drift towards miscellany. In fact, he says, “If anything should survive untouched by the third order of order and the rise of the miscellaneous, it ought to be the periodic table of the elements” (40). I don’t think Weinberger need to change his title to Everything is Miscellaneous (Except the Periodic Table of Elements), but I’m curious if the periodic table of elements is the only method of organizing information on paper (whether in existence, or only potential) that should “survive untouched.” I think he’s done a good enough job covering mankind’s problematic attempts to systematize knowledge that I don’t think all (or even very much) of knowledge could be contained effectively on paper. I would be interested to see him speculate how much knowledge can “[lay] bare some real joints of nature” (40).
I thought of this picture when I was reading about the difficulty of categorizing everything. I was spraying Musk Thistle this summer when I came across this extremely rare, white-flowering Musk Thistle. Is it still a Musk Thistle?

Here is an interesting visualization of information that includes another factor: time. This information is influenced by how much time has passed since you opened the page.
Richard Samuelson
You said: "He comes to the conclusion, though, that the periodic table of elements contains intrinsically valuable information in its own layout. He seemed to find it as an exception to the inevitable and fitting drift towards miscellany."
ReplyDeleteOh how I hated that table when I had to use it all the time, but it did have an incredible amout of information in it's structure. I like that there is something that is a third order meta data construct that not only exists in reality, but is functional and accessable in that reality. It kind of gives me hope that we won't all be glued to the internet for the forseable future. I wonder though, how many things could be table-ized (is that a word?) in this way? And the fact is, that no matter how useful that table is, you have to know quite a lot just to be able to use it. I can just go to google and find alkaloids in about 30 seconds, and I don't even have to know what it is.
The idea of the passing of time while sitting at the computer reminds me of what it is to shut off from digital media and plug into life around us. One of my students today write she is interested in looking at our (U.S.) obsession with reality shows. One comment in particular struck me as she inquired, why do we feel the need to sit around watching someone elses life instead of living our own? I think there has to be some sort of baleance as healthy individuals where we can sit through a conversation with a friend without thinking about our phone, facebook, or whatever other media we are a part of. We complain we never have enough time to enjoy life... But that time is spent somewhere. How do we unplug and live life but also be able to be a part of a fast paced digital world that is always growing and changing without us?
ReplyDeleteI completely forgot about posting comments before class, but now I have the advantage of having mulled over the time issue for an extra day. In that time, something dawned on me - does this concern possibly result more from our conception of time than our interaction with technology? In the US, time is a commodity. We save it, spend it, etc. This, combined I think with a healthy dose of yea old protestant work ethic, seems to make us also hyper concerned about it's passing. Some things are "good", sanctioned uses of our time like homework, eating dinner with the family, etc. And others are not, such as reality TV. Maybe we should be categorizing time differently? "time I spent doing something I enjoyed", "Time I spent doing something obnoxious that I had to do in order to do things I enjoy" "time I spent doing something I did not enjoy, and that resulted in no benefit to myself or others" etc. (me thinking aloud, not a perfect system) The last category is the only one I'd really be concerned about. I recently read a novel where old men spent hours in the evening seeing who could spit into a spittoon positioned the greatest distance away, the entire time rarely talking. Even without tech. I'm sure I'd find similar ways of "wasting" time...
ReplyDelete