I really enjoyed this. The thought I find most fascinating is that while all trees above ground may seem solitary, below there is of course a network of root systems. However at some point we must assume people looked at trees with no knowledge of the roots below, even though obviously the roots had to come first before growing into the tree itself. So, my question, I guess, is, as our visualization of human knowledge evolves and shifts, are we really moving forward? Or is it that the more information and capability we have allows us to pull back and see the larger picture, essentially working backwards? It’s not so different from as a child recognizing the triangle as a 2-dimensional shape, and as you grow learn that it can also correctly represent a 3-dimensional pyramid, shown in 2 dimensional form. What we knew with absolute certainty as a 5 year old gets added to and becomes entirely different as we experience and gain knowledge. And of course, it makes you wonder, keeping my real-life metaphor of a tree, if we’ve moved from our understanding as a tree, now down to the roots, what will our understanding of knowledge look like next?

Agradeço a Margarida Ferreira pela tradução das legendas para o português-BR. Isso realmente ajuda bastante a todos os brasileiros.

It's not the Tree of Life. But the Web of Life. Great Idea. Thank you.

Finally a good one! I learned more from the first 2 minutes of this talk than from the last ten combined.

"no matter where you are, everyone is always connected"

Very enlightening! Wanna watch again ;)

I just love this video as it is the matter of my interest: knowledge Generation and culture....

Nice presentation. Makes a change.

This talk is so interesting.

I keep wondering if it's possible to present information using virtual reality, the upcoming revolutionary medium, in a way so that users would be able to manipulate or understand the data in unique ways that wouldn't otherwise be possible. Is there a way, for example, to convert data into a handheld sized object that could be examined intuitively, feeling natural for real 3D-world beings?

Interesting talk. Can't help feel that the desire to encapsulate a network into a diagram is that different from the first example, of putting 'god' at the top. That is to say, you can't actually capture the dynamic or magnificence of the totality, hence why the visualizations remain 'flat', and why those rope art pieces are so powerful.

I am now officially a networkist.

I love a good network but I was hoping he was going to show us something he'd done with this information

Decentralize everything! THANKS!

Fascinating

What would be the leaves of the tree that can heal the nations? Can anyone please help?

Bravo!

best transition ever on 4:51 - a man yawning on the bottom of the screen

I'd like to see a network of networks

This is wonderful

Look into systems dynamics and systems thinking. Their archetypes and models of relationships may inform some of his models of networks.

Great!

This needs more views!

Misleading title, was not expecting a history of tree and circular representations of human knowledge. I clicked because i wanted to see history of knowledge represented visually. So disappointing..

Btw great presentation!

Mind Blown..

Very interesting talk.. and this guy sounds like a voice actor for some of the characters in Skyrim >_>

You try to give the video more brightness it will be great if you do

Yeah, but you know what i like more than materialistic things? KNAWLEDGE

Fantástico!

Intro to graph theory

Marvellous

For our universe, if you need to get whole knowledge, yet for this time. A knowledge is saved in human mind, books, internet etc.

3:09 - the more we know about the brain, the more we think of it as a large music symphony Fascinating subject, but simplistic and lame analogy. I've read book after book about the brain and neuroscience and I have never heard this metaphor used at all. Instead of touting the "network" as the new way to visualize things, when you look at the PERL collaboration diagram it may not be that the network is the paradigm, but that this is mapping out data for which we have not yet found an order. A network is like the raw data, the substrate, and the order lives on that substrate. I just say this because I think the human brain cannot really integrate in an intuitive sense a network or data, we form little trees/hierarchy subtrees starting in whatever focus. Like in other areas, especially internet arguments, we reduce things, all to often to linearities ... but even that is OK if we know the data and know where it is linear and the behavior of other variables around what we are looking at. I'm just thinking, the network is the data, the tree is the way we visualize it.

No any knowledge can escape. Knowledge will save and save.

network - butterfly - in trees

When you will be completely calm also your mind & complete body, then you will understand the knowledge.😊🎉

Amazing how he covers so many eons of human knowleddge systems in a short presentation

mind mapping ?

i love networkism

The tree visual still the best, could be expanded to 3D tree

It should be called a history of humans visualizing their knowledge

About truth knowledge. Everything good, that you looking is happen by good. good is equal to truth knowledge. If you good, truth knowledge will come to your mind.

Is this guy brazilian?

Dream mean what you see during sleep. Insortion mean what you make in mind with thinking. Exporation mean what new developing good in soul. Moxoration mean what new developing bad in soul. Poration meaning what new developing wether it is good or bad in soul.

Trees and Networks are both Graphs. Trees are Graphs without loops. Networks are Graphs of any kind. Did we really need a TED talk for this?

NOKIA Connecting People

If living thing has complete knowledge that it is required, then it will be fully satisfied.😊

This universe started before 1 lac years ago. Please make calendar accurate. (English calendar) 😊 Jan, feb, march etc.

good

Just about every network diagram that was shown was outright useless. The point of those trees is that they can be followed and referenced by humans, while the point of those network diagrams was almost invariably "We had this dataset so why not generate a pretty graph" or "Look how complicated my field is, guys!" A family tree, for example, can be used as-is. It contains the data, it contains the relationships as part of the graph. Meanwhile, a graph of ten million neurons is absolutely useless; it's only derived off of the data that was already collected, and nobody will ever use that graph for anything substantive.

knowledge

🏆👏👏👏👏👏😇

PORTUGAL CARALHO :D

Deleuze and Guattari anyone?

Quantum Entanglement.......Everything and everyone is connected!

Networks are fine if you take Socialism as the ultimate model of righteousness. I don't. On the other hand, the flaw of the tree metaphor was not that it inadequately met our modern needs, but that it is upside down. In our modern world, 'HERE and NOW', is the essence. This means the tree trunk should be current time, current place, and the branches should trace various profundities of causality that occurred to bring us there. Try that, picture your family tree as YOU-centric, and everything before you as branches disappearing finely into the small details above you, into the ethereal sky, tinier and tinier in consequence... but the mass of your tree, is who YOU are and what YOU'VE become... now the tree metaphor is perfectly modern and relevant.

second comment

Natwork

naa twerk

Everything is spiderman webs now

Like si estás aquí por tu profe de Filosofía :,cc

OMG Ramon Llull is not ''lul'' is ''yuy'' PLZ jajaja

Idk.. Not a fan of classification especially in this sense..

I think this signifies a growth away from the outdated notion that there needs to be a constant hierarchy in our everyday lives that has been limiting us socially and culturally for centuries, Who knows maybe Anarcho-syndicalists are onto something

Rari 🐕

Too much maps with less than enough to describe the concept. I have watched pictures, but less likely to remember the facts been said in the video. The quality of the information is not considered, only facts and personal beliefs. I was interested to see the video, but now I think it was a waste of time. If I'm about to present such an interesting topic, I would stimulate the appeal to acquire knowledge using facts from real life, break them down, simplify them and offer the audience a challenge they experience in their daily life, then I would think of a way to make them save the information being shared with them so they can use it in their daily life. Afterword, I would describe how human beings organize their ideas, mapping them, and how data are being stored then presented. At the end, I would use the whole video to illustrate the reason behind using those maps and how important they're to describe the topic. Cheers :D

human knowledge is on the low thanks to smart phones

networkism is because we "may" be understanding the paradigm of the ancients. implosion energy (matriarchal) vs. explosion energy (patriarchal). Networks are inherently feminine.

Well tree is a network as well.There is no central core,leader.The human mind made it so.Greed.

BUT WHY?

Isn't everything you need to know in the bible? I mean, the koran? I mean the torah? Hang on, I mean the book or Mormon?

His accent is so painful to listen to. He pronounces web "wæb".

Idk.. Not a fan of classification especially in this sense..