Monthly Archives: February 2009

Knowledge = connection….

I have responded to George’s post on the network and individual’s liberty here: https://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/the-network-and-individuals-liberty/

My observation is: It may be worthy to think about knowledge not just in terms of connections, but the Yin/Yang or connections/disconnections followed by re-connections of another kind. The CCK08 well demonstrates some of the Yin/Yang effect in terms of how knowledge is co-created, consumed, re-defined and re-created. If we are to classify people under the concept of Yin/Yang, we would always find the strong opposite voices revolving in the interactions. As everyone of us is made up of the Yin/Yang in our mind we would also be sharing our Yin/Yang (positive and negatives) perspectives with each others. Also, the Yin (off or disconnected) would also be balanced by Yang (on or connected) depending on the how, when, where, who and what you want to be connected to.

If you are connected to me, and we both share common interests, the Yang takes effect. However, if you don’t think this connection is worthy, then the Yin (disconnection) takes effect. So the notion of knowledge = connection could be subject to a strong human dimension and personal preference (this includes intrinsic motivation, likes and dislikes, shared interests and emotions out of interaction). Would this be one of the primary factors in determining whether people would comment on other’s blogs or not?

This could also be the case when we are learning through the artifacts. We like or dislike a book or an article based on whether we could resonate with the concepts, understand the underpinning logic, and verify the validity of points, and gain values behind the ideas or facts presented by the author or blogger. If the contents are based on opinions rather than “facts”, then we would check the source and reasons of those opinions before we make a judgment on its value.

Based on the Yin/Yang concept, disconnection over the net (Web or Social Networks) may not be a bad thing, and could even be a good thing in some cases. This applies to those people who prefer to maintain a healthy balance of their life, by actually learning through personal meditation, prayers or the few close or strong connections only. For some people, too many connections may cause distractions, physical or mental discomfort or pain. This is based on my observation and notion that some people dislikes the use of internet, virtual social networks as a source of knowledge, but would prefer to be connected to their selected real world, the real people, and the real artifacts instead. The few real strong personal networks that could add value to their life.

This concept is validated to some extent with some of my strong connections (friends, relatives).

Would human elements play an important role in the perception of knowledge?

So does knowledge also come through some disconnections and re-connections (of a different kind)?

What is in your mind? Is pattern = knowledge?

I received this from my beloved sister.

Only great minds can read this quickly
This is weird, but interesting!
fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too

Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno’t mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is t aht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it

Is it recognition out of our words and passage?

Can you read other’s mind through such means?