My Opera
On Categories
Tuesday, April 28, 2009 10:28:12 AM
People tend to assert certain names to certain things and find relations among them. Usually we call those names categories. For example; you may have heard of classical music, rap, pop, rock... or landscape photography, portraiture, fashion, sports... or parts of the brain like cortex, cerebellum, thalamus...
This is all OK, but the problem is, that most of the people take those categories too seriously or too literally. There is no distinct border between classical or rock music because those two categories of the same category of art (again, category) share many similarities and even common grounds. Of course, they have some differences, but where would you draw the line??? These labels are here not because they would represent some real categories, they are here just to help us communicate and they serve well as long as we keep in mind that things are a lot more organic and complex in reality.
The same goes for every other kind of category; categories in art, categories in tools even categories in different types of personalities, modes of thinking, creativity processes and so on!
Even experts (especially psychologists have this tendency) like to have things sorted out in drawers; keep a name for every thing that occurs. But the life is complex and organic; people can't just fit in a drawer because much like rock and classical music, there is no distinct line between musical or graphical kind of creativity. Again; these words are here just to help us understand each other and do not represent real (=physical) differences in direct and literal terms as many would have liked. This would have given a lot of consolation for many who would like to think that they have figured the world out. But they haven't. In fact they are often using fancy words to cover up their infantile understanding.
[/IMG]
Perhaps it has to do with survival; people who have their experiences sorted out are in better position to survive (tigers are dangerous, olives are good, apples are healthy...), but in modern society we should know better than that. We should understand that the underlying nature of the world is a lot more astonishing than we could even begin to understand and that the words we come up with to describe it may represent only a selected few of its surface properties.
So yes; use "categories" but only to the extent where you are still aware of the fact that this are just words, made up by humans and do not necessarily reflect the actual nature of things.
Image by striatic
This is all OK, but the problem is, that most of the people take those categories too seriously or too literally. There is no distinct border between classical or rock music because those two categories of the same category of art (again, category) share many similarities and even common grounds. Of course, they have some differences, but where would you draw the line??? These labels are here not because they would represent some real categories, they are here just to help us communicate and they serve well as long as we keep in mind that things are a lot more organic and complex in reality.
The same goes for every other kind of category; categories in art, categories in tools even categories in different types of personalities, modes of thinking, creativity processes and so on!
Even experts (especially psychologists have this tendency) like to have things sorted out in drawers; keep a name for every thing that occurs. But the life is complex and organic; people can't just fit in a drawer because much like rock and classical music, there is no distinct line between musical or graphical kind of creativity. Again; these words are here just to help us understand each other and do not represent real (=physical) differences in direct and literal terms as many would have liked. This would have given a lot of consolation for many who would like to think that they have figured the world out. But they haven't. In fact they are often using fancy words to cover up their infantile understanding.
[/IMG]Perhaps it has to do with survival; people who have their experiences sorted out are in better position to survive (tigers are dangerous, olives are good, apples are healthy...), but in modern society we should know better than that. We should understand that the underlying nature of the world is a lot more astonishing than we could even begin to understand and that the words we come up with to describe it may represent only a selected few of its surface properties.
So yes; use "categories" but only to the extent where you are still aware of the fact that this are just words, made up by humans and do not necessarily reflect the actual nature of things.
Image by striatic
Stardancer # Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:47:21 PM
A post of truth, Nikio.
Thank you.
(Your photo of what appears to be a library's card catalog illustrating your point is profound. Well done.)
Nikio # Tuesday, April 28, 2009 7:27:43 PM
Shaunak DeShaunak # Monday, May 11, 2009 12:50:17 AM
I guess categorisation in moderation is not a bad thing.
Ps: Taxonomy I believe is the art and science of categorization.
Nikio # Monday, May 11, 2009 6:52:42 AM
Now the second person (B) comes around, let's say a student, who didn't study all of the data and works from the other end. He or she will learn the system (where the lines are) first and then fill them with data. Many times B will think he has the stuff figured out just because the lines were there before him. "I know how it works," he might say. And that is a mistake.
I'm not saying it is wrong to categorize. I enjoy making folders, drawers and such things myself!
It's OK as long as we keep in mind that the reality is far more complex and connected than that.