| Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:18:32 -0700 | 04 00067 61 00062902 |
Mr. Bill Bearden
BBearden@BCL.net
unrev-II@egroups.com
| Subject: | DKR Enables Knowledge Mapping |
Dear Bill,
Sorry have not been able to respond sooner to your letter on June 6, 2000.
The aim of a knowledge management effort is to map a share of important connections showing cause and effect that the mind forms when it encounters information during a meeting, looking at a picture, reading a book, walking across the street, i.e., input from sight and sound that constitutes human experience.
This uses alphabet technology in a different way, to set out and analyse the why and wherefore of events in order to grow understanding of cause and effect. In the same way that a farmer puts seeds in the ground to grow crops, humans use information to grow knowledge. A tractor helps the farmer grow more crops. Technology can likewise help people grow more knowledge provided the technology aids specific cognitive processes that need help. In particular we want to identify gaps in facts and reasoning by checking alignment, so we can make corrections in small communication miscues before they become big problems. The DKR rigged in a certain way can hardwire the relationships so we can get them back when needed to improve spontaneous impressions. The DKR provides context that leverages the value of information. It enhances research by providing a routine template of structure that extends traditional punctuation and rules of grammar for imparting meaning to information.
It is not all a bed of roses. When we begin making connections, the result looks confusing to some. Jack and Doug are working on tools to improve the view.
There is a lot more that can be accomplished with an engine of knowledge to enhance traditional work practices: for example, reporting, engineering, law, medical practice, accounting, scientific research, etc. In short, the DKR provides an environment and tools (OHS) for getting a share of our knowledge into a form that allows it to be tested for accuracy, and applied consistently, promptly when and if needed. The big distinction between this idea and the popular notion of storing "knowledge" from books, magazines and so on in a repository, is that each of us have a lot of knowledge from our daily experience that we primarily rely upon to do our work and live our lives. This latter body of stuff is what we want to improve, and in doing so, the formal stuff in books will get better also.
Sincerely,
THE WELCH COMPANY
Rod Welch
rowelch@attglobal.net
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:51:27 -0500
| From: | Bill Bearden |
|
BBearden@BCL.net |
| To: | unrev-II@egroups.com |
| Subject: | 2020 Hindsight: A Fictional DKR Narrative |
You bring up an interesting and valid point with which I am currently struggling. I have been reading (and trying to understand) some of Malhotra's extensions of Churchman, esp.
http://www.brint.com/members/online/200603/kmhitech/kmhitech.html.
There, Malhotra quotes Churchman:
This sounds very much like what you say.
But if knowledge can not exist outside of the mind, how can a DKR be possible? By this definition, neither book nor computer can contain knowledge. I believe in the concept of the DKR. Therefore, I can not accept a definition which fundamentally prevents its existence.
So, with your definition, my previous comment about knowledge being everywhere is not valid. But I would guess that your definition invalidates lots of things that have been discussed.
Bill