/* ---- Google Analytics Code Below */

Wednesday, May 12, 2021

Ghosts Using Data, Children too

Hmm, can tell you that in any business problem you have to have the correct data to derive something useful.    To walk away with some sort of algorithm that later works.  Either to create or validate a model.   So if the data is badly gathered you don't have much clue.    But it seems humans work for a model.  But from data. So why does that work at all?  ..  Some related thoughts:

The ghosts in the data,   Mar 26, 2021

Bernadette Resha, Gathering of Ghosts (2014)

Something I’ve been thinking about recently as I’ve been working at a company that operates entirely remotely and mostly asynchronously during a time when most companies are working in some variation of this model is the idea of implicit versus explicit knowledge.

Explicit knowledge is anything that you can read about, knowledge that’s easy to share and pass on. Implicit knowledge is knowledge that people gain by context that’s very hard to pull out consciously. The best example of this is from this paper on language acquisition,

Children acquire their first language by engaging with their caretakers in natural meaningful communication. From this “evidence” they automatically acquire complex knowledge of the structure of their language. Yet paradoxically they cannot describe this knowledge, the discovery of which forms the object of the disciplines of theoretical linguistics, psycholinguistics, and child language acquisition.

This is a difference between explicit and implicit knowledge—ask a young child how to form a plural and she says she doesn’t know; ask her“ here is a wug, here is another wug, what have you got?”and she is able to reply,“two wugs.” The acquisition of L1 grammar is implicit and is extracted from experience of usage rather than from explicit rules.  .... 


No comments: