Kat’s talk concentrates on how we can use our ontological techniques on our own self-awareness.
Next at #IAS18 – map your own ontology and create an ethical statement! Join @Katalogofchaos to learn how and why to do this. https://t.co/GRErBcug4O pic.twitter.com/9E9r1WP0Un
— IA Summit #ias18 (@IAsummit) March 23, 2018
How can I be confident that my work is good? It can be a paralyzing question #ias
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Our choices have consequences, which can also be paralyzing #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
How do you make sure that you good work? Most folks don’t have great answers. So Kat developed personal ontology mapping #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
At the Reframe IA Roundtable last year someone brought up the idea of being a baker as a foil for what we do as IAs. Oh, and these decisions are regarding professional work, not other work. Bakers make food for humans milled grains and heat #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If a baker is technically good, they understand materials, control of the process, and consistency or predicable output. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
How would we know whether a baker’s work is Good in some deeper way? We have responsibility within a human system. If you’re a baker on a spaceship that bakes for no one, you’re not really a baker #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If we all share the responsibility of “food” through responsibility for our specialities. Bakers are “responsible” for bread. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
A Baker is Bad if they don’t let everyone get access to the bread. Carbon footprint? Labor conditions? Vegan? Nutrition? Those heuristics are different for all of us #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Information architects (for this talk) are responsible for ontological alignment. We need to make sure that people understand the ontologies. We also want to make sure the service is offering does what we think it does #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
IA is also the way that you sort and the people you support. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Kat’s ontology:
1. Truth is not Objective
2. Small things matter
3. Diversity is essential#IAS18— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
As a person each of us exists in space and time, and we experience things. As that happens it creates a network of understanding in our brains. That understanding lets us communicate with each other #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
What you think about “squirrel” isn’t the same thing I think about “squirrel” but it’s close enough that we can understand each other #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
There’s two ways to think about being objective. The first is that things are happening to us, but there may not be something objectively true outside of us. If we talk about Objectivity it’s external to reality. But we have no way to check each other on this #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
There’s a power dynamic in determining Objectivity. “God told me I’m king now.” #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Anything external to people we interact with directly, then we share those experiences with others, and wherever we overlap, that’s truth. That’s little-o objectivity. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
The stuff we make reflects the ideas we have. And most of what we see every day is made by us. Even at the planet scale we mostly experience the same things – gravity, for example #IAS18 Gravity is objectively true.
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Truth is contextual. Is a balloon going up or down in a picture of a balloon? Is the mars rover coming down? What does down mean in context? #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
We make things. Things we interact with that are things we make. When we make a thing, we need people to understand the things they need to understand to use the thing. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If we claim socks are accessories and not underwear – we may be able to make claims to back that up. But what happens when we use that assumption to make a thing, others get evidence that our truth is theirs because they’re using our thing #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If we’re only concerned about socks and whether they’re accessories and underwear, all the other decisions are making may be filled with our defaults. Those may be providing evidence about our world. The ideas you have affect the information you can receive #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
For a very long time folks didn’t know how eggs and sperm become one creature. Their incorrect understanding made understanding the actual behavior harder because the old beliefs overlapped the new evidence #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
When we inspecting things, if we don’t think consciously about all the assumptions that we hold, then we may be passing on ontologies that we don’t actually support #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
A decision you make now has ramifications way down the line as people operate with the things you’ve made. But you can only measure good in your own ontology because you only have access to your own understanding #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Hey thing makers: entailments. You haz them @Katalogofchaos #ias18 pic.twitter.com/DRvxmdaFIu
— dan klyn (@danklyn) March 23, 2018
— dan klyn (@danklyn) March 23, 2018
If you’re not intentional you’ll probably default to the things that are most important to *you*, not to others #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Diversity matters. Cognitive based non-routine problems are best solved by a team with diverse heuristics #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Things we make are: pic.twitter.com/srxvX1CUUN
— dan klyn (@danklyn) March 23, 2018
If everyone looks through their own lens and then discusses it, we can reach agreement about our experiences. We decide who to ask, and we interpret the results. We decide what to leave out as outliers. If we’re not diverse groups we may not make good choices #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If you don’t know your own assumptions, you may think someone else’s ontologies are incorrect when they’re just as valid as yours #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Mapping your own ontology: not a worksheet. It’s about systems, not states. You need to adopt this to do it constantly. This doesn’t mean you have to accept everything someone says #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Some ontologies are opposed. Kat believes ontologies matter. White supremacy is opposed to that – and Kat doesn’t need to accept that because it would destroy her ontologies. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
That should say “Kat believes diversity matters” but when I get too far behind typing some things get dropped in the translation.
Many moments are only important in retrospect. If you’re not already doing good things and thinking about the choices you’re making. A part of all this human made stuff means we’ve inherited older ontologies, and they need to be examined. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Start with “Murder is bad” for example. What is murder? To kill a human on purpose. What’s it mean to kill? What’s a human? Who counts as humans? Is it bad to kill non humans? What’s it mean to do something on purpose? #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If “I don’t know, that’s just how it is” is how you think about something, recognize that *that’s* how you think of that thing, because those are your biases. And you’ll be bringing them to every table where you sit #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Embrace the discomfort. We cling to the structures we’re using our whole life. Embrace discomfort. Are there ideas there that I don’t actually think are good? Reject things you disagree with, behave differently, so that when the big moment comes you’re already doing right #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If you don’t need to be right, does it matter? Does someone else have access to experiences or understanding that you don’t? If “only” 10% of the population has a different experience you should probably listen to them anyway #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
“That’s not what gravy is”. It’s a very different definition from one place to another. Might be minor at your house, might be huge at your supermarket #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Maybe it’s bad to kill self-kinds (other humans). Maybe it’s bad to kill kinds that have names (like your cats). Or maybe it’s bad to kill cute things. Or maybe it’s bad to kill any animal. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
The talk right now from @Katalogofchaos is one of the most important talks I’ve ever heard at this conference.
A gently convicting charge to make ontological clarity for our own values — because otherwise we don’t understand the lenses we are using for everything else. #ias18— Andrew Hinton (@inkblurt) March 23, 2018
If the place you might be working doesn’t support an ontology that’s important to you, you probably shouldn’t work there. If the ontology is important, maybe it’s worth fighting that fight. If you have this ontology it helps you understand the Good of your work. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Feel free to disengage if there’s an ontology that you can’t support – you don’t have to fight it. “That’s OK, I can be patient while you think this through.” #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Where is the place of authority? Base your life on evidence. If they have valid evidence, then it’s worthwhile. If the “evidence” circles back on itself, then it’s probably not worthwhile. And convincing them is a whole different problem. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
How do you balance camaraderie with exposing things that might be uncomfortable for you? No one’s perfect at it. Try not to intimidate people into shutting up. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
How does accountability fit into this? “It has to be my way because in the end I’m the one who gets fired.” If it matters, find a way to let go of some of your beliefs. If you’re accountable and making the decision you should at least make people feel heard #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
If someone’s making the decision but you’re accountable it could be a very toxic situation and you probably want to get out of it #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Organizations have often not done this work for themselves. What does this mean in a collective sense? Ultimately orgs that have no answers are probably toxic systems. Work on fixing their rhetoric dishonesty and/or get out. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018
Facebook isn’t what they say they are – they say they’re a social group to help people, but their decisions don’t reflect that. #IAS18
— Anne Gibson (@perpendicularme) March 23, 2018