The classification of thought

Aristotle was the world’s first librarian and the world’s first information architect. He came up with categories of thought and in a way systematically broke down information through classification systems.

In a way Socrates also was the designer of discipline-based divisions in thought.

Today, 2,000+ years later we continue on a path of divergent thought – a path of sub-division of thought and knowledge. I have been suggesting that divergence is an incomplete phase of a cycle of thought. It’s complimentary phase is convergence, integration, synthesis, (multilectics). Also, I have been suggesting that the cycle of convergence-divergence thought needs to keep on cycling. In other words as we converge, synthesize and integrate ideas, theories, philosophies, disciplines we also need to continue to diverge them, sub-divide them, specialize them, and classify them (it’s not a paradox – its a process).

The simplexity cycle of thought
The convergent-divergent cycle of thought is a kin to the cycle of simplexity (where we recognize that simplicity and complexity are both complimentary phases in a complete cycle.) In other words, thought gets complicated, specialized and micro-specialized into ideas, theories philosophies and disciplines but thought also needs to be re-connected, integrated, synthesized in order to gain wider-deeper insights, wider-deeper learning and wider-deeper understandings. (interdisciplinary education / transdisciplinary education).

Alienation through specialization and classification
We have organized different ways of thinking into rigid classifications systems. The classification systems have grown more and more complex and the thinking tools and processes have been re-classified and re-named within each of our disciplines. As disciplines specialize the re-classification happens again, and again until we hardly even recognize the same type of thinking across disciplines.

In other words, each version of a thought process is locked inside a disciplinary silo.

What’s even worse is that we forget to integrate new forms of thinking back into the wider index of general thinking processes.

Even worser…the average Joe and Jane out here never learns to use the thinking tools that others have used successfully.

Thinking tool mining
Today there are hundreds of complex types of thinking tools buried deeply in physics, mathematics, the sciences and in all of our disciplines. Most of these thought processes have already been labeled with names, they have been used successfully within context.

Thought process mining
What we need to do today is to identify those thinking tools, thinking processes and classify them also into a “general thinking” category. Here, they will become available in a way that anyone can use them to solve other problems.

Possible benefits
1. energize thinking, creativity and innovation in general
2. improve our thinking skills literacy
3. advance all our disciplines by leaps and bounds
4. solve problems we haven’t been able to fix in years
5. more successful models of interdisciplinary / transdisciplinary education

Related on Wikipedia (highly recommended):
Wikipedia Thought portal >>
Wikipedia list of thought processes >>
Wikipedia list of philosophies >>
“Glossary of philosophical isms” >>

Related in this blog
Changing the educational system with systems thinking

…………………..
-Daniel Montano
…………………..
Keyword: Daniel Montano, Dan Montano, user experience design, information architect