This was almost therapeutic to read. I struggled with the same kind of reductionism in college and I’d always find myself running in circles, frustrated that I didn’t understand the “underpinnings” of anything I studied. I too had an obsession with order and the idea of the knowledge-gaining process being nonlinear was something I categorically rejected. It took me a long time to appreciate the “cluster and connect” approach of building up knowledge (eg locally learning in different areas and then connecting the dots). Thanks for the insightful post!
Super interesting thought provoking read!! I was never the person to need to understand any more than the bare minimum to understand something else but I always did admire people who wanted a deeper understanding
I am a high schooler
I just got curious and started reading books
I started with Theology
And then science and history sociology and psychology
I became so addicted that I could not stop
I wanted all knowledge
But then I realised humans have limited knowledge till now which is constantly expanding
Then I tried to know how many subjects are there
How can I categorise all human knowledge
At one place
Then I searched for it I got to know about library science
How they classify all human knowledge
I got curious
I googled it and that said that there are nearly 120 million books and internet data Is also there
How they classified all of this in some finite classes
I mean since human knowledge is vast but limited for now so this is possible to classify all Human knowledge
But I am curious that How much time
It take to do it
And what is the exact process of doing it
Do they read index and summary of all 120 million books and make a classification table
How exactly it's all done
Also new discoveries are taking place
How they update their table
Are these tables complete atleast when they are published
Can I call them complete and detailed
Is there such thing I complete classification of all fields of knowledge
Atleast for that moment when new discoveries are left uncategorised
Dewey decimal classification
Universal decimal classification
10 pillers of human knowledge
Propaedia outline of knowledge
Do they cover all human knowledge I mean all subjects and fields
Without leaving anything
Atleast when they are revised and published
Or can I say that
They cover everything
But
Leaving some concepts
Here and there
Miscellaneous
Which are not a discipline in itself
Context free information
Or
They covers trunk all branches of knowledge tree But leave the leaves that are small topics behind
This was almost therapeutic to read. I struggled with the same kind of reductionism in college and I’d always find myself running in circles, frustrated that I didn’t understand the “underpinnings” of anything I studied. I too had an obsession with order and the idea of the knowledge-gaining process being nonlinear was something I categorically rejected. It took me a long time to appreciate the “cluster and connect” approach of building up knowledge (eg locally learning in different areas and then connecting the dots). Thanks for the insightful post!
Super interesting thought provoking read!! I was never the person to need to understand any more than the bare minimum to understand something else but I always did admire people who wanted a deeper understanding