The hard sciences are definitely homophilic in that most scientists will coalesce around the best, current research. You can’t be considered a serious biologist, for instance, if you advocate Intelligent Design.

The problem is that politics and culture and history don’t have a mathematics of proof the way science does. So you still need lots of diverse ideas to pick through and play with to help refine your sense of judgment. I agree with your take on recommendations; I never use them either.

Some good sources here, thanks for posting them. I’m looking forward to spending some happy hours indulging myself.

Hey, that’s another good source. Thanks!

http://thoughtcast.org/casts/more-neologisms-from-the-world-of-the-web

There are a bunch of alternatives to homophily that you can seek out if you know you want them.

Just to name some -

“neophily”, the love of the new; follow this by reading wire services, looking at new books at the library, otherwise sorting your preferences to “most recent first”

“retrophily”, the love of the old; transpose your current interests into another time frame and see how things were done before.

then you start to figure out other ways in which you can sort your world to make unexpected things regularly go to the top, while still being predictable and methodical about it. One lens is geography, so you ask yourself “how do they do this in Keene, NH” (you know that) or “how do they do this in Ann Arbor, MI” or your favorite far-away close-by place. There’s some element of homophily there, since you’re more likely to have an “other place” that’s more like where you are, but it’s a start.

this reminds me of this essay by Lindsay Marshall:

http://vielmetti.typepad.com/vacuum/2007/05/lindsay_marshal.html
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Lindsay/Writing/serendip.html

“We are not, I believe, looking for tools to record our thoughts or to provide them with structure. What we seek is something that leads us to the unforeseen collisions, the copulations that lead to new thoughts, new connections and yet more new meetings.”

Agree about recommendations (tendency to lead to more of the same) vs serendipity (unexpected delights).

Maybe there’s a great role for (human) curators. I guess ala TED. But the idea that there’s a level of quality (in terms of passion, presenting etc) you can expect from what they select for you. You don’t have to worry about selecting yourself, just know that chances are you’ll enjoy it.

And thanks for the podcast links – look great.

Thanks Thad. So, it looks like you’re having an interesting experience in Tanzania!

“I’ve always found “This American Life” to be a good source of “driveway moments”.”

Yes, absolutely, should’ve mentioned that too.

“http://tedblog.typepad.com/tedblog/2006/06/introducing_ted.html”

Interesting. That one points to an iTunes URL. It’s evidently not advertised on the TED site itself, but easy to find if you search in iTunes. Which for some reason I rarely think to do, because I always expect that the publisher of a feed will be its most obvious source.

For the Ted audio, try http://tedblog.typepad.com/tedblog/2006/06/introducing_ted.html

I did not know this existed — thanks.

Best Regards,

Clifford Thompson