Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Just add oughta.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                     

Stop Associating Conceptual Models

Society for Prevention of Associating One Mental Model of a Concept With Any Other
  (+2)
(+2)
  [vote for,
against]

The SPAOMMCWAO would stop and prevent the association of one model of understanding of any concept with any other, and thus, life would be far happier and glorious.

Most if not more than that of the trouble in the world is caused by incorrectly attributing attributes of a certain mental model of understanding of a thing or action or process, with another that looks or seems similar or related. This must be stamped out.

Similarly, philosophy seems similar to this. Stop it. It isn’t.

Ian Tindale, Jun 20 2016

Tesching by Exclusion Teaching_20by_20Exclusion
A good way of envisaging this idea. [8th of 7, Jun 20 2016]

Conceptual models https://www.google....LaT4KHfT6ByMQsAQIGw
No tesching. By exclusion or with your sweaty little hands. [bungston, Jun 21 2016]

[link]






       An example might help...
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 20 2016
  

       This is almost analogous to your "Teaching by Exclusion" idea, [Ian] <link>, but with a couple of specific differences.
8th of 7, Jun 20 2016
  

       Well, teaching by exclusion was the act of catching all the likely possible incorrect ways of “getting it”, that aren’t actually the correct thing that you’re on about at all, except in the mind of the incorrect student who doesn’t realise it. When you expose an incorrectness and point out it isn’t that, they’ll know, the model is demolished, and they’ll drop through to the next available understanding, and you then demolish that if that too is one of the commonly nearby incorrect ways of comprehending.   

       This is different. This says don’t take a concept and simply apply generalisations to attributes that enable you to easily and effortlessly understand a new nearby model in terms of one you already understand. Everything must be independent, different, isolated and unconnected, and stay that way since the first cognisant life forms formed conceptual models of sensory experience.
Ian Tindale, Jun 20 2016
  

       So, just like playing snakes and ladders with fried eggs, then ?
8th of 7, Jun 20 2016
  

       So pantheism as opposed to a monotheistic take on unified science. How would we ever convert units?
RayfordSteele, Jun 20 2016
  

       No, not like any other concept at all — how can it be? This is independent. The chase for a unified view of stuff is an unhealthy illusion, but also, nothing to do with this. Neither is this.
Ian Tindale, Jun 20 2016
  

       // This says don’t take a concept and simply apply generalisations to attributes that enable you to easily and effortlessly understand a new nearby model in terms of one you already understand. Everything must be independent, different, isolated and unconnected, and stay that way since the first cognisant life forms formed conceptual models of sensory experience.//   

       An example might help...
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 20 2016
  

       There aren’t any, and no, it wouldn’t help, nothing can help. Nothing at all, everything has gone beyond that, the mess of smearing and brownian mixturing of everything into everything else because it seems easier to understand has gone too far.
Ian Tindale, Jun 20 2016
  

       Ah, right. So, it's an inexplicable solution to a non- existent problem. That's pretty much a box-ticker here, I guess.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 20 2016
  

       //it's an inexplicable solution to a non- existent problem// - or vice versa
hippo, Jun 20 2016
  

       This Idea would forbid puns. I object!
Vernon, Jun 20 2016
  

       Conceptual models? Still failing to understand what Ian was on about (did I get the British right?) I thought I might take a gander at these off-limits models by googling up conceptual fashion; linked.
bungston, Jun 21 2016
  

       Would not implementation of this idea preclude the application of mathematical modeling ?
8th of 7, Jun 21 2016
  

       Yes, but that would be OK. Many of them are not so glamorous anyway.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 21 2016
  

       What language would you choose to use in this method of teaching? As soon as you chose a language it would violate the terms. A completely senseless amalgam of French, (in other words, common French) would be your only option. And we don't utter the black speech here.
RayfordSteele, Jun 21 2016
  

       This has nothing to do with teaching. Teaching is futile — an underpaid management-driven waste of time.
Ian Tindale, Jun 21 2016
  

       Association by metaphor seems a good way to convey a concept for easier understanding and communication. But taking that metaphor as a literal and complete explanation is diving for pearls in a kiddy pool.
LimpNotes, Jun 21 2016
  

       // Teaching is futile //   

       <notes that [IT] is looking increasingly ripe for Assimilation>
8th of 7, Jun 21 2016
  

       //Teaching is futile — an underpaid management- driven waste of time.//   

       With that, I take issue. I like to think I am fairly smart, and am smug enough to think that I would have learned by myself if nobody had taught me. But that is probably not the case. I was lucky to have some very good teachers - from primary school through my D. Phil.   

       Large parts of the way I think (not to mention a great many of the things I know) I can attribute to some of those teachers and mentors. This point may be raised at my trial.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 21 2016
  

       // Large parts of the way I think ... I can attribute to some of those teachers and mentors. //   

       You're not going to get away with the "I was just obeying orders" defence a third time, you know; and Sturton has pretty much played out "the voices in my head were particularly loud and insistent that day" line.   

       You should consider adopting the Intercalary's technique - he already owns several judges, so buying the jury as well can't be that expensive.
8th of 7, Jun 21 2016
  

       Max, you studied under Dr. Phil? Before or after Oprah?
RayfordSteele, Jun 21 2016
  

       So, [Ian], the annotators seem to suppose that you're against analogies, but that's not what the idea seems to say.   

       If you were against analogies, then you would want to stop one model being associated with multiple concepts - an odd, but clear position.   

       However, the idea, as written, does not want that. Nor does it want to prevent multiple models of the same concept.   

       It only wants to prevent ... ummm ... something like mixed metaphors, except that it's disputable whether all models are metaphors. No, let me try that again; the idea wants to establish hygienic boundaries between distinct models of any given concept?   

       So, for example, no doodling BPMN on your ERD?
pertinax, Jun 24 2016
  

       Should this idea be now rewritten as Stop Associating? Or is that too soon?
theircompetitor, Jun 24 2016
  

       Too late, at least compared to the market responses.
RayfordSteele, Jun 24 2016
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle