Re: [-empyre-] n-dimensional cobwebs of meaning

[ben syverson <ben@bensyverson.com>]

On May 11, 2004, at 12:52 AM, John Hopkins wrote:

> There seems to be a slight (or more profound) oscillation in the text 
> above that is equating the representation to the thing itself -- I 
> think there is a fundamental separation, and that this should not be 
> lost in the discussion of this liken-language-structure -- it is 
> another representative system. (the representation of a boxing ring 
> and a representation of the Coliseum)...

Exactly, I was addressing Ken's question about "is conceptual 'space' 
more than a metaphor?" That is, can it map in any way to a real or 
representational space? Surely liken nodes are not the things 
themselves and merely conceptual placeholders, but does that knowledge 
simplify the problem at all?

This all stems from an attempt to find an easy-to-understand graphical 
interface for liken, in which the relationships between nodes could be 
visually interpreted. Since a cluster couldn't work, what would? I 
could see a sort of 3D tree of choices, with each choice branching off 
into its choices, but I think that's just a pretty version of a 
textual, hierarchical list.

Our hope is that someone will be [challenged/inspired] by these 
dilemmas and create their own interface as a way to explore them. But 
really, I don't want to mischaracterize criticalartware as being 
interested primarily in the cognitive science of user interface. We are 
extremely interested in [mapping/navigating] the concepts of the site, 
but we're far more interested in the actual [concepts/connections] 
themselves. I fear we're talking a great deal about liken itself, so 
maybe now that I've clarified the background and nature of liken, we 
can delve into some other aspects of criticalartware.

- ben