"Just because we can’t articulate an idea doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist."
~Howard W. Campbell, Poker Without Cards
The articulation of ideas often appears to me as irresponsible from the perspective of a non-royal historian, those of us seeking to expand knowledge without the patronage of a Hegemony.
My professional career after being a theatrical magic, began in consumer research, where we regularly constructed segmentation solutions for magickal corporatons, those following their fiduciary responsibility and seeking to make more money. In my construct below, corporations are Magick by their lack of nature.
Segmentation solutions are inexact, although we seek to provide Mutually Exclusive, Completely Exhaustive segments, our divisions are static and life is dynamic. And, they can be useful in progressing an agenda.
My hobby is philosophy. In philosophy we approach segmentation analyses in ontology. Ontology is the study of being and how patterns of thought affect patterns of action, grows when common-realms-of-knowledge expand on their interconnectedness, where a large enough population uses similar enough words for their ideas to commingle, evolving together into a meme pool, which appears to me as metaphysical gravity, generating what Kurt Vonnegut termed the constellation of those attracted to pool of ideas as it's Karass.
To this end of expanding a common realm of knowledge through useful vocabulary, I identified two patterns of thoughting presented in Poker Without Cards which I label as Nacirema and Attacca.
I have recently expanded and completed my first ontological segmentation solution. My 4-segment solution includes: Nacirema, Attacca, Magick & AKS.
This construct is based on the work of Howard W. Campbell who explored the internal validity of mathematics, and how rules are developed when discrepancies are noticed between math and nature.Campbell wrote about how Gödel said that validity comes from outside of a system: like how in grade school they don’t let students use a form of the word they are defining in their definition, Gödel says the opposite can also be the case, something can be true and not contained within a system.
For your considerations...
Attacca - Attacca is the backbone of science, what many people generalize as left-brain thinking. I define Attaccan thoughting as coporting to a set of rules, with exacting internal consistencies.
Nacirema - Nacirema emerges in the absence of Attacca, what many people generalize as right-brain thinking. I define Nacirema thought as associative, ideating away from existing streams of thought.
Magick - Magick is our mind's mother tongue, where meaning is derived from the results we produce. I Magick thought as comporting to an agenda.
AKS - AKS is the notorious "other" category, the catch-all for thoughting systems that are either outside of this rubric, or blend there of.
It is unlikely that my model will be discussed in The Academy, unless I foist it on them. From a Media Studies perspective, I produce outsider philosophy, rarely considered worthy for their serious discourse. I don't write for them, and many of their currently popular ideas appear to me as irresponsible.
Indulge me in a disclaimer, "For although in a certain sense and for light-minded persons, non-existent things can be more easily and irresponsibly represented in words than existing things, for the serious and conscientious historian it is just the reverse. Nothing is harder, yet nothing is more necessary, than to speak of certain things whose existence is neither demonstrable nor probable. The very fact that serious and conscientious men treat them as existing things, brings them a step closer to existence and to the possibility of being born." ~Herman Hesse, The Glass Bead Game